Task: songer_othjury

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. The issue is: "Did the court conclude that the jury composition or selection was invalid or that the jury was biased or tampered with?" Answer the question based on the directionality of the appeals court decision. If the court discussed the issue in its opinion and answered the related question in the affirmative, answer "Yes". If the issue was discussed and the opinion answered the question negatively, answer "No". If the opinion considered the question but gave a mixed answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part, answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion does not discuss the issue, or notes that a particular issue was raised by one of the litigants but the court dismissed the issue as frivolous or trivial or not worthy of discussion for some other reason, answer "Issue not discussed". If the opinion considered the question but gave a "mixed" answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part (or if two issues treated separately by the court both fell within the area covered by one question and the court answered one question affirmatively and one negatively), answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion either did not consider or discuss the issue at all or if the opinion indicates that this issue was not worthy of consideration by the court of appeals even though it was discussed by the lower court or was raised in one of the briefs, answer "Issue not discussed". If the court answered the question in the affirmative, but the error articulated by the court was judged to be harmless, answer "Yes, but error was harmless". 

PER CURIAM.
Brought by plaintiff-appellant against Sid W. Jensen, alleged to be a resident of Dade County, Florida, and Ruth Mark Jensen Cresse, hereafter entitled Ruth Cresse, alleged to be a resident of the State of New Jersey, the suit was for damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in an automobile collision, in the State of Florida, between an automobile driven by him and an automobile owned and driven by Ruth Cresse.
On Motion of defendant Ruth Cresse, that it affirmatively appears from the amended complaint that, under Sec. 1391 (a), Title 28 U.S.C.A., there is improper venue, the suit was dismissed without prejudice, and plaintiff has appealed.
Here citing in support the decision and opinion of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, in Burke v. Greer, 114 F.Supp. 671, appellant insists that, though defendant has not waived the venue privilege, Sec. 1391 (a) supra, the fact that plaintiff joined her with a co-defendant who was suable in Florida, has in some way not made clear deprived her of it.
Appellee, citing Olberding v. Illinois Central R. Co., 346 U.S. 338, 74 S.Ct. 83, 98 L.Ed. 39, insists that, upon principle and authority, appellant’s position is without merit, and the judgment must be affirmed. We agree.
The judgment is affirmed.
. “1391. Venue generally.
“(a) A civil action wherein jurisdiction is founded only on diversity of citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, be brought only in the judicial district where all plaintiffs or all defendants reside.”

Question: Did the court conclude that the jury composition or selection was invalid or that the jury was biased or tampered with?
A. No
B. Yes
C. Yes, but error was harmless
D. Mixed answer
E. Issue not discussed
Answer:

Answer: E