Quality cost information reports . Multiple select question. show managers if quality control costs are poorly distributed help identify the financial cost of defects give managers an idea of where to focus quality control efforts always identify lost sales from customer ill will

Awidower devised his fee simple interest in his residence as follows: “to my daughter for life, then to my oldest grandchild who survives her.” at the time of the widower’s death, he was survived by his only two children, a son and a daughter, and by one grandchild, his daughter’s son. a short time later, the daughter together with her son entered into a contract to sell the residence in fee simple to a buyer. the applicable jurisdiction continues to follow the common law rule against perpetuities, but has abrogated the rule in shelley’s case. at the closing, the buyer refused to purchase the residence. can the sellers compel the buyer to do so?

Serious question, which is preferred in a business? pp or poopoo?

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court. the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center. because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.