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 determine what category of business best describes the area of activity of this litigant which is involved in this case.

Opinion:
HERB FORD, Inc., a Corporation, Herb Ford, L. G. Seacat, and Herman Roennfeldt, Trustees, Appellants, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY and M. D. Brown, Appellees.
No. 10336.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Dec. 17, 1935.
E. H. McVey, of Kansas City, Mo. (C. A. Randolph, Spurgeon L. Smithson, and Stanley Garrity, all of Kansas City, Mo., on the brief), for appellants.
John G. Madden, of Kansas City, Mo. (James E. Burke and Madden, Freeman & Madden, all of Kansas City, Mo., on the brief), for appellees.
Before GARDNER, WOODROUGH, and FARIS, Circuit Judges.
FARIS, Circuit Judge.
This is a joint appeal by Herb Ford, Inc., a bankrupt, and the directors of the corporation, who sue as trustees under a Missouri statute (Rev.St.1929, § 699, Mo. St.Ann. § 699, p. 906), so permitting'in a proper case. The case, except for the above lack of identity as to parties plaintiff, and the joinder as a defendant of one Brown, the agent of defendant Ford Motor Company, who made the alleged agreement relied on, involves precisely the facts, pleadings, and vicissitudes of procedure set out and discussed, in the case of Albert Tamm, Trustee of Estate of Herb Ford, Inc., a Bankrupt, Appellant v. Ford Motor Company, Appellee (C.C.A.) 80 F.(2d) 723, this day decided. Doubtful it is plain, touching in whom title to the chose in action vested on bankruptcy, counsel ex abundanti cautelae, deemed it wise to begin and maintain two suits on precisely identical facts.
Because on bankruptcy the title to the chose in action did not pass to the appellants herein, but to the trustee in bankruptcy, and for the other reasons set out in the companion case above styled, this case should be affirmed with costs, which accordingly is ordered.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "private business (including criminal enterprises)". What category of business best describes the area of activity of this litigant which is involved in this case?

Choices:
agriculture
mining
construction
manufacturing
transportation
trade
financial institution
utilities
other
unclear

Answer: 9