Task: songer_method

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. Your task is to determine the nature of the proceeding in the court of appeals for the case, that is, the legal history of the case, indicating whether there had been prior appellate court proceeding on the same case prior to the decision currently coded. Assume that the case had been decided by the panel for the first time if there was no indication to the contrary in the opinion. The opinion usually, but not always, explicitly indicates when a decision was made "en banc" (though the spelling of "en banc" varies). However, if more than 3 judges were listed as participating in the decision, code the decision as enbanc even if there was no explicit description of the proceeding as en banc.

PER CURIAM.
Katherine Lumpkin appeals from the District Court’s dismissal of her tort complaint against the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. She contends that the District Court erred in holding that the municipality is immune from suit under Arkansas law. Her complaint in this diversity action states that she was severely burned in 1958 by the City’s negligent placement of “smudge pots” containing hot oil near her home. The City moved to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The District Court issued a memorandum and order dismissing the complaint because, under Arkansas law on the date of the injury, tort actions against cities were barred by the doctrine of municipal immunity. We affirm the District Court’s dismissal on the basis of its memorandum.
Lumpkin also challenges the constitutionality of the Arkansas sovereign immunity doctrine. We find no merit in the challenge.
The order of the District Court is affirmed.
. Plaintiff, who was three years old at the time of her injury, filed her complaint the day before her twenty-first birthday.
. Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, Judge, United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division.
. The parties agreed that Arkansas law was applicable to the action.

Question: What is the nature of the proceeding in the court of appeals for this case?
A. decided by panel for first time (no indication of re-hearing or remand)
B. decided by panel after re-hearing (second time this case has been heard by this same panel)
C. decided by panel after remand from Supreme Court
D. decided by court en banc, after single panel decision
E. decided by court en banc, after multiple panel decisions
F. decided by court en banc, no prior panel decisions
G. decided by panel after remand to lower court
H. other
I. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: A