Task: songer_dueproc

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. You will be asked a question pertaining to issues that may appear in any civil law cases including civil government, civil private, and diversity cases. The issue is: "Did the interpretation of the requirements of due process by the court favor the appellant?" Answer the question based on the directionality of the appeals court decision. If the court discussed the issue in its opinion and answered the related question in the affirmative, answer "Yes". If the issue was discussed and the opinion answered the question negatively, answer "No". If the opinion considered the question but gave a mixed answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part, answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion does not discuss the issue, or notes that a particular issue was raised by one of the litigants but the court dismissed the issue as frivolous or trivial or not worthy of discussion for some other reason, answer "Issue not discussed". If the opinion considered the question but gave a "mixed" answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part (or if two issues treated separately by the court both fell within the area covered by one question and the court answered one question affirmatively and one negatively), answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion either did not consider or discuss the issue at all or if the opinion indicates that this issue was not worthy of consideration by the court of appeals even though it was discussed by the lower court or was raised in one of the briefs, answer "Issue not discussed".

PER CURIAM.
The real estate sold by the trustee in bankruptcy in this case was appraised for more than twice the amount of the mortgage indebtedness, and hence the court was justified in ordering a sale free from liens. The sale was adequately advertised •and properly conducted. It is true that the price obtained was much less than the appraised value, and even less than the amount of the mortgage debt, but there is nothing in the record to justify the expectation that the property would bring more at a resale. The unsecured creditors do not oppose the confirmation of the sale. No offer to pay more than the sum offered by the successful bidder at the auction sale has been received; and the mortgagee has declined the offer of the court to order a resale on the condition that the mortgagee secure the estate against any loss that might occur thereby. There was no abuse of discretion on the part of the court in refusing to set aside the sale. On the contrary, the order appealed from was entirely justified.
Affirmed.

Question: Did the interpretation of the requirements of due process by the court favor the appellant?
A. No
B. Yes
C. Mixed answer
D. Issue not discussed
Answer:

Answer: D