Task: songer_appel1_7_2

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 first 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 the gender of this litigant. Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity (e.g., the sex of "Chris" should be coded as "not ascertained").

PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from a summary judgment for the defendant in a wrongful death action under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688. To hold the employer liable under this Act it must be shown that the death was attributable to some negligence for which the employer was responsible. The trial court found on undisputed evidence that there was no negligence attributable to the employer. We affirm.
The plaintiff’s husband Moore was a laborer on defendant’s pipeline barge and served as union steward for that job. He was authorized under the labor contract to perform union business during working hours. Desiring to attend a two-day union meeting on shore, but having no automobile, Moore asked a fellow employee, Nugent, to drive him to the meeting. While returning to the dock from the union meeting, Nugent was involved in an automobile accident in which Moore was killed. This action against the barge company ensued.
It is undisputed that Moore’s death resulted from the negligence of Nugent. For liability to attach under the Jones Act, however, it is necessary that the negligence be imputed to the employer. Hopson v. Texaco, 1966, 383 U.S. 262, 86 S.Ct. 765, 15 L.Ed.2d 740. Under the labor contract, no employee, with the possible exception of the union steward, had any right to shore leave until the job was completed. When Nu-gent left the barge, he left the scope of his employment relationship and the employer barge company was no longer responsible for his actions. Thus, the district court properly entered summary judgment for the employer on the undisputed showing that Moore’s death, not being caused by the employer, its agent, or its employee, was not subject to the Jones Act.
Since Moore’s death was not the responsibility of the employer, it is unnecessary to determine whether the two-day absence of Moore is more closely related to the “authorized shore leave” of Aguilar v. Standard Oil Co., 1943, 318 U.S. 724, 63 S.Ct. 930, 87 L.Ed. 1107, or the off duty time in Daughdrill v. Diamond M. Drilling Co., 5 Cir. 1971, 447 F.2d 781, and Sellers v. Dixilyn Corp., 5 Cir. 1970, 433 F.2d 446.
Affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first 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)". What is the gender of this litigant?Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity.
A. not ascertained
B. male - indication in opinion (e.g., use of masculine pronoun)
C. male - assumed because of name
D. female - indication in opinion of gender
E. female - assumed because of name
Answer:

Answer: D