If an article has 5 authors, how should they be cited the first time in the text?

On january 1, 2017, fisher corporation purchased 40 percent (90,000 shares) of the common stock of bowden, inc. for $980,000 in cash and began to use the equity method for the investment. the price paid represented a $48,000 payment in excess of the book value of fisher's share of bowden's underlying net assets. fisher was willing to make this extra payment because of a recently developed patent held by bowden with a 15-year remaining life. all other assets were considered appropriately valued on bowden's books. bowden declares and pays a $90,000 cash dividend to its stockholders each year on september 15. bowden reported net income of $400,000 in 2017 and $348,000 in 2018. each income figure was earned evenly throughout its respective year. on july 1, 2018, fisher sold 10 percent (22,500 shares) of bowden's outstanding shares for $338,000 in cash. although it sold this interest, fisher maintained the ability to significantly influence bowden's decision-making process. prepare the journal entries for fisher for the years of 2017 and 2018. (if no entry is required for a transaction/event, select "no journal entry required" in the first account field. do not round intermediate calculations. round your final answers to the nearest whole dollar.)

Cash flows during the first year of operations for the harman-kardon consulting company were as follows: cash collected from customers, $385,000; cash paid for rent, $49,000; cash paid to employees for services rendered during the year, $129,000; cash paid for utilities, $59,000. in addition, you determine that customers owed the company $69,000 at the end of the year and no bad debts were anticipated. also, the company owed the gas and electric company $2,900 at year-end, and the rent payment was for a two-year period.

David paid $975,000 for two beachfront lots in coastal south carolina, with the intention of building residential homes on each. two years later, the south carolina legislature passed the beachfront management act, barring any further development of the coast, including david's lots. when david files a complaint to seek compensation for his property, south carolina refuses, pointing to a passage in david's own complaint that states "the beachfront management act [was] properly and validly designed to south carolina's " is south carolina required to compensate david under the takings clause?