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 gender of this litigant. Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity (e.g., the sex of "Chris" should be coded as "not ascertained").

Opinion:
BRODSKY v. SAFEWAY STORES, Inc.
No. 8943.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia.
Argued Nov. 14, 1945.
Decided Dec. 17, 1945.
Mr. Mark Friedlander, of Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Jack Politz, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. Richard W. Galiher, of Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Henry I. Quinn, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, WILBUR K. MILLER, and PRETTYMAN, Associate Justices.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s complaint charged that appellee allowed vegetable debris to be on the floor of its store and so caused appellant, a customer, to fall and be injured. There was evidence that appellant slipped on some green vegetable. There was no evidence as to the quantity on the floor, how it got there, or how long it had been there. For all that appears, a customer may have dropped a small vegetable just before appellant fell and appellee’s employees may have nad no chance to discover and remove it. Since there was no evidence to the contrary, there was no evidence of negligence on appellee’s part either in creating the alleged condition or in permitting it to continue. Accordingly the trial judge was right in directing a verdict for appellee. A storekeeper is not an insurer of the safey of his premises but is responsible only for negligence. If there had been evidence that the condition complained of had continued for a substantial time there might have been a question for the jury.
Affirmed.
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Williams, 59 App.D.C. 347, 41 F.2d 970; Selby v. S. Kann Sons Co., 61 App.D.C. 36, 73 F.2d 853; Sanitary Grocery Co. v. Snead, 67 App.D.C. 129, 90 F.2d 374, certiorari denied 302 U.S. 703, 58 S.Ct. 22, 82 L.Ed. 543. There is nothing to the contrary in Washington Loan & Trust Co. v. Hickey, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 59, 137 F.2d 677.
Washington Market Co. v. Clagett, 19 App.D.C. 12; Hellyer v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 62 App.D.C. 318, 67 F.2d 584; District of Columbia v. Richards, 75 U.S. App.D.C. 349,128 F.2d 297.

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 gender of this litigant?Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity.

Choices:
not ascertained
male - indication in opinion (e.g., use of masculine pronoun)
male - assumed because of name
female - indication in opinion of gender
female - assumed because of name

Answer: 4