Task: songer_direct1

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Your task is to determine the ideological directionality of the court of appeals decision, coded as "liberal" or "conservative". Consider liberal to be for government tax claim; for person claiming patent or copyright infringement; for the plaintiff alleging the injury; for economic underdog if one party is clearly an underdog in comparison to the other, neither party is clearly an economic underdog; in cases pitting an individual against a business, the individual is presumed to be the economic underdog unless there is a clear indication in the opinion to the contrary; for debtor or bankrupt; for government or private party raising claim of violation of antitrust laws, or party opposing merger; for the economic underdog in private conflict over securities; for individual claiming a benefit from government; for government in disputes over government contracts and government seizure of property; for government regulation in government regulation of business; for greater protection of the environment or greater consumer protection (even if anti-government); for the injured party in admiralty - personal injury; for economic underdog in admiralty and miscellaneous economic cases. Consider the directionality to be "mixed" if the directionality of the decision was intermediate to the extremes defined above or if the decision was mixed (e.g., the conviction of defendant in a criminal trial was affirmed on one count but reversed on a second count or if the conviction was afirmed but the sentence was reduced). Consider "not ascertained" if the directionality could not be determined or if the outcome could not be classified according to any conventional outcome standards.

PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a decision of the district court dismissing the claim of plaintiffs in an action for injuries sustained in Virginia. The sole question involved is whether the action is barred by the statute of limitations in Virginia. If it is then, under the borrowing statute in Pennsylvania, it is barred here, Pa. Stat.Ann. tit. 12, § 39, Purdon 1953. If barred in the state court it is also barred in federal court in a case depending upon diversity for federal jurisdiction as this one does. Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 1945, 326 U.S. 99, 65 S.Ct. 1464, 89 L.Ed. 2079.
Interpretation of the Virginia legislation upon this subject is not too easy a task but has been well done by Judge Van Dusen who heard the case in the district court. D.C.E.D.Pa.1956, 141 F. Supp. 592. We have nothing to add to his analysis of the Virginia decisions and statutes.
The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Question: What is the ideological directionality of the court of appeals decision?
A. conservative
B. liberal
C. mixed
D. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: A