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.
These appeals are from summary judgments granted to Packaging Corporation of America in actions brought against it and others to recover damages for the death of Robert F. Schenk and injuries to William E. Loehr, which resulted from an automobile accident in Michigan. The car in which they were riding came in contact with a tractor-truck loaded with pulpwood, or with some portion 0f the load, and the death and injuries followed.
The Packaging Corporation’s motion for summary judgment was based on the fact that the pulpwood was being delivered to one of its plants by an independent contractor over whom it had no sort of control, nor had it exercised or attempted to exercise control over him. The District Court granted the motions and directed the entry of final judgments in favor of Packaging Corporation, as he expressly determined under Rule 54(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., that in these multiple party actions there was no just reason for delay. Thus the appeals are properly before us even though the claims against the other defendants have not been adjudicated.
We affirm the judgments of the District Court on the opinion of District Judge Noel P. Fox in Schenk, Admr. v. Packaging Corporation of America (our number 17,387), which is reported in 267 F.Supp. 439 (1966).
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