Pogrund Vacation Properties sells real estate in Florida. Pogrund requires potential buyers who are interested in a property to remit a $10,000 deposit to show good faith before receiving detailed information about a property. The deposit is fully refundable until a contract is signed. When a contract is signed, the buyer must make an additional deposit to bring the total deposit up to 10% of the purchase price. At that point, the entire deposit becomes nonrefundable. On December 31, 2019, David Corporation makes a good faith deposit of $10,000. David makes an additional $85,000 deposit on March 31, 2020, when it signs a contract to purchase property from Pogrund for $950,000, bringing its total deposit up to 10% of the purchase price. On June 30, 2010, David Corporation informs Pogrund that it has decided to terminate the contract, as is its right, and will not complete the purchase of the property. Under the terms of the contract, the entire deposit was nonrefundable and is retained by Pogrund. Required:What is the journal entry Pogrund makes to record the receipt of the $10,000 good faith deposit on December 31, 2019?What is the journal entry Pogrund makes on March 31, 2020 to record the receipt of an additional $85,000 from David Corporation when it signs the contract?What is the journal entry Pogrund makes on June 30, 2020 when David notifies Pogrund that it is terminating the contract?

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.