The English economist William Stanley Jevons described a world tour during the 1880s by a French singer, Mademoiselle Zelie. One stop on the tour was a theater in the Society Islands, part of French Polynesia in the South Pacific. She performed for her usual fee, which was one-third of the receipts. This turned out to be three pigs, 23 turkeys, 44 chickens, 5000 coconuts, and "considerable quantities of bananas, lemons, and oranges." She estimated that all of this would have had a value in France of 4000 francs. According to Jevons, "as Mademoiselle could not consume any considerable portion of the receipts herself, it became necessary in the meantime to feed the pigs and poultry with the fruit." Source: W. Stanley Jevons, Money and the Mechanism of Exchange, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1889, pp. 1-2. Do the goods Mademoiselle Zelie received as payment fulfill the four functions of moneyLOADING...?

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.