Task: songer_appel2_7_5

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the second listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". Your task is to determine which of these categories best describes the income of the litigant. Consider the following categories: "not ascertained", "poor + wards of state" (e.g., patients at state mental hospital; not prisoner unless specific indication that poor), "presumed poor" (e.g., migrant farm worker), "presumed wealthy" (e.g., high status job - like medical doctors, executives of corporations that are national in scope, professional athletes in the NBA or NFL; upper 1/5 of income bracket), "clear indication of wealth in opinion", "other - above poverty line but not clearly wealthy" (e.g., public school teachers, federal government employees)." Note that "poor" means below the federal poverty line; e.g., welfare or food stamp recipients. There must be some specific indication in the opinion that you can point to before anyone is classified anything other than "not ascertained". Prisoners filing "pro se" were classified as poor, but litigants in civil cases who proceed pro se were not presumed to be poor. Wealth obtained from the crime at issue in a criminal case was not counted when determining the wealth of the criminal defendant (e.g., drug dealers).

PER CURIAM.
This is a suit in equity in which the appellant, the plaintiff below, sought a decree declaring void a lien asserted by the. appellee, the defendant below, upon a certain automobile, and sought also to compel the appellee to deliver a certificate of title to the car. There was a counterclaim by the appellee which sought delivery of the car to it or in lieu thereof damages in the sum of $350. The decree was for the appellee.
In its decree, the trial court said:
“This cause coming on to be heard at this term of Court upon the pleadings, and admitted evidence as submitted to the Court by counsel in open Court, and the Court having jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties, and upon consideration of the admitted facts, and it appearing to the Court that the defendant, General Credit, Inc., is the holder of a recorded chattel mortgage on a certain 1938 Plymouth Sedan Automobile, Serial Number 10542389, Motor Number P6-128183, in the amount of $350.00, and that the automobile is in the possession of the plaintiffs, and it further appearing to the Court that the defendant is entitled to the automobile by virtue of its recorded chattel mortgage or in lieu thereof the satisfaction of its lien in the amount of $350.00, it is, by the Court, this 23rd day of May, 1939, adjudged * * [Italics supplied]
There is nothing in the record indicating what the admitted evidence was, or what the court found as admitted facts. If the foregoing recital was intended to be a finding of facts, it was but partial. Numerous other items of fact were in issue under the pleadings.
Rule 52 of the Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts of the United States, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, requires that; "In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment; * * */’
In the absence of the evidence upon which the case was decided and of findings of fact, the case is not in a condition to be reviewed. See Boss v. Hardee, 1937, 68 App.D.C. 75, 93 F.2d 234, upon the necessity of findings.
The decree is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Question: This question concerns the second listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". Which of these categories best describes the income of the litigant?
A. not ascertained
B. poor + wards of state
C. presumed poor
D. presumed wealthy
E. clear indication of wealth in opinion
F. other - above poverty line but not clearly wealthy
Answer:

Answer: A