With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the master of her complaint, and she is entitled to forego her claims for recovery beyond $75,000.00 if remaining in state court is more appealing to her. However, it is troublesome when a plaintiff purposely remains ambiguous in an attempt to defeat federal jurisdiction. While the plaintiff is entitled to some choice in determining where to litigate her case, it is not her right to deny a defendant its right to remove a case to federal court where federal jurisdiction exists. 6 . Basing a decision to remand upon a post-removal affidavit would not run afoul of St. Paid's rule which prohibits a plaintiff from defeating federal jurisdiction by amending his complaint after removal, although some courts have held otherwise. See Matter of Shell Oil Co., 970 F.2d 355, 356 (7th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); Unified Catholic Schools of Beaver Dam Educ.

A: holding that unlawful threat by defendant to he about plaintiff and deny everything if plaintiff brought a lawsuit were cured under st louis park factors
B: holding that lake only overruled st julien prospectively
C: holding that even if an agreement that title would pass once financing was obtained the most a creditor could claim was a security interest once the good was delivered
D: holding that once a defendant removes a case st paul makes later filings irrelevant
D.