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.

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.
This appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia overruling the petition of the appellant to vacate and set aside the verdict of the jury of inquisition and the order of the court concerning the same entered on the 28th day of March, 1924, in which appellant was adjudged to be of unsound mind and committed to Saint Elizabeth’s Hospital for the Insane.
The proceeding amounts to a collateral attack upon the judgment, and invokes the jurisdiction of the court to vacate and set aside the judgment confirming the verdict of the jury without bringing to the attention of the eourt the evidence adduced at the trial on which the verdict was based. In the absence of the evidence, it will be presumed that it was sufficient to support the verdict of the jury and the judgment entered thereon. The learned trial justice, disposing of the ease, said: “The court is of opinion that the regularity of the proceedings should be presumed; as well, also, that it should be presumed that there was testimony in the case tending to support the jurisdictional aver-ments found in the petition for the writ de lunático to the effect that the respondent, in addition to being of unsound mind, had tendencies dangerous either to herself or others; and, a fortiori, should such presumption be indulged in as against a collateral attack subsequently made.”
It is further asserted that the notice served upon appellant in the lunacy proceedings was insufficient and void. It appears, however, that appellant appeared and was present at the proceedings, which constitutes a waiver of any defect in the notice.
As further bearing on the insufficiency of plaintiff’s petition to invoke the jurisdiction sought, it may be suggested that while a decree of insanity may be inquired into at any time for the purpose of determining whether or 'not the person has become sane, the petition to vacate in the present ease contains no suggestion of present sanity, nor is any such contention made in the ease.
The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

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: B