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 "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". Your task is to determine the race or ethnic identity of this litigant as identified in the opinion. Names may be used to classify a person as hispanic if there is little ambiguity. All aliens are coded as "not ascertained".

Opinion:
Azalee BESHEARS, Appellant, v. Anthony J. CELEBREZZE, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee.
No. 21323.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 30, 1964.
James L. Shores, Jr., Birmingham, Ala., Curtis Wright, Gadsden, Ala., for appellant.
John T. Thomas, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Macon L. Weaver, U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., for appellee.
Before JONES and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, claiming disability benefits under the Social Security Act, appeals from the judgment of the District Court affirming the action of the Secretary in denying her application. 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 405(g), 416(i) and 423. The Hearing Examiner concluded that she had not established that her mental and physical impairments, either singly or in combination, were of such severity as to preclude her from engaging in any substantial gainful activity during the effective time of her application. The Appeals Council denied review.
We are convinced from a careful study of the record that this conclusion rests on a sound basis, and that it is supported by substantial evidence. There the matter ends. Clinch v. Celebrezze, 5 Cir., 1964, 328 F.2d 778.
Affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". What is the race or ethnic identity of this litigant as identified in the opinion?

Choices:
not ascertained
caucasian - specific indication in opinion
black - specific indication in opinion
native american - specific indication in opinion
native american - assumed from name
asian - specific indication in opinion
asian - assumed from name
hispanic - specific indication in opinion
hispanic - assumed from name
other

Answer: 0