Task: songer_appel1_1_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 "private business (including criminal enterprises)". Your task is to classify the scope of this business into one of the following categories: "local" (individual or family owned business, scope limited to single community; generally proprietors, who are not incorporated); "neither local nor national" (e.g., an electrical power company whose operations cover one-third of the state); "national or multi-national" (assume that insurance companies and railroads are national in scope); and "not ascertained".

BRYAN, Circuit Judge.
Appellant leased a store building for one year from January 1, 1931, to G. T. Bufkin, who in March of that year was adjudged a bankrupt. The rent was paid up to the date of sale in April of the assets of the bankrupt’s estate. The landlord’s claim of lien on the goods in the store at the date of bankruptcy for the rent that had not accrued was disallowed. He appeals, and for ground of reversal relies on section 2175 of the Mississippi Code of 1930. '
That section provides that no goods on leased premises shall be taken by virtue of any writ of execution or other process, unless before removal there shall be paid all unpaid rent for not exceeding one year whether due or not. Section 2186 gives the landlord a lien on agricultural products of leased premises. The Supreme Court of Mississippi, in construing these two Code sections, has held that the landlord has no lien for rent upon his tenant’s goods other than agricultural products, but that until distress is levied upon such other goods he has the right only to exact payment of rent before they can be taken off the premises by legal process. White v. Miazza-Woods Construction Co., 122 Miss. 213, 84 So. 181; Engleburg v. Tonkel, 140 Miss. 513, 106 So. 447. Very similar Illinois statutes were given a like construction by the Supreme Court in Morgan v. Campbell, 22 Wall. 381, 22 L. Ed. 796. The earlier Mississippi Supreme Court eases of Rice v. Harris, 76 Miss. 422, 24 So. 880, and Epstein v. Farr, 112 Miss. 530-, 73 So. 572, do not in our opinion announce a different rule; but, if they do, they must give way to the later above-cited decisions of the same court. The landlord, not having been given a lien by the state law, has. none; and it follows that the ruling of the District Court was correct.
The order appealed from is affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "private business (including criminal enterprises)". What is the scope of this business?
A. local
B. neither local nor national
C. national or multi-national
D. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: A