Task: songer_typeiss

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Your task is to determine the general category of issues discussed in the opinion of the court. Choose among the following categories. Criminal and prisioner petitions- includes appeals of conviction, petitions for post conviction relief, habeas corpus petitions, and other prisoner petitions which challenge the validity of the conviction or the sentence or the validity of continued confinement. Civil - Government - these will include appeals from administrative agencies (e.g., OSHA,FDA), the decisions of administrative law judges, or the decisions of independent regulatory agencies (e.g., NLRB, FCC,SEC). The focus in administrative law is usually on procedural principles that apply to administrative agencies as they affect private interests, primarily through rulemaking and adjudication. Tort actions against the government, including petitions by prisoners which challenge the conditions of their confinement or which seek damages for torts committed by prion officials or by police fit in this category. In addition, this category will include suits over taxes and claims for benefits from government. Diversity of Citizenship - civil cases involving disputes between citizens of different states (remember that businesses have state citizenship). These cases will always involve the application of state or local law. If the case is centrally concerned with the application or interpretation of federal law then it is not a diversity case. Civil Disputes - Private - includes all civil cases that do not fit in any of the above categories. The opposing litigants will be individuals, businesses or groups.

HITZ, Associate Justice.
This is an appeal by defendant below from an order of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia awarding plaintiff below alimony pendente lite upon a bill for limited divorce on the ground of cruelty.
The bill was filed February 5, 1930, together with a motion for alimony pendente lite.
On February 11,1930, separate motions to dismiss the bill and to strike out certain portions thereof were filed by the defendant.
The motion to dismiss was denied, and the motion to strike granted by one order dated February 17, 1930.
And on the same date, by a separate order of the court, alimony pendente lite was granted, from which order alone the defendant brings this appeal.
He assigns as error: (1) The denial of his motion to dismiss the amended bill of complaint; (2) the awarding of alimony pendente lite to the plaintiff.
It is unnecessary to consider the first assignment, or the defendant’s right or procedure on an appeal from the order denying Ms motion to dismiss the bill, because no appeal was taken from that order.
As to the second assignment of error, based upon the order awarding alimony pendente lite, it is settled that the granting or refusing of alimony pendente lite rests in the discretion of the trial court, not to be disturbed by the reviewing court, except for a clear abuse. Tolman v. Tolman, 1 App. D. C. 299; Shaw v. Shaw, 2 App. D. C. 204; Lesh v. Lesh, 21 App. D. C. 475; Reed v. Reed, 52 App. D. C. 36, 280 F. 1009; Wygodsky v. Wygodsky, 134 Md. 344, 106 A. 698.
But in this ease there is no showing of any abuse of discretion, and no answer to the bill into which we might look for such a showing.
The order appealed from is therefore affirmed, with costs.
Affirmed.

Question: What is the general category of issues discussed in the opinion of the court?
A. criminal and prisoner petitions
B. civil - government
C. diversity of citizenship
D. civil - private
E. other, not applicable
F. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: D