opinion: AMERICAN UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a Rhode Island Corporation, Appellant, v. KARPET KRAFT FLOOR COVERING SERVICES, INC., a Minnesota Corporation, Appellee.
  No. 20162.
  United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
  Sept. 29, 1970.
  O. C. Adamson, II, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant; Mary Jeanee Coyne, Minneapolis, Minn., on the brief.
  Lynn G. Truesdell, III, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellee; Nathan A. Cobb, Minneapolis, Minn., on the brief.
  Before GIBSON and LAY, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge.
  PER CURIAM.
  This appeal involves an action for indemnity of monies paid to a third party for damages arising out of an accident on property owned by the plaintiff’s insured. Plaintiff sought reimbursement from Karpet Kraft Floor Covering Services, Inc., a lessee, on the basis of its alleged implied contract to secure repairs on the lessor’s behalf for the premises in question. The trial resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff; however, the trial court, the Honorable Miles W. Lord, presiding, thereafter granted defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Upon review of the record this court is in full accord with Judge Lord’s reasoning that the record is barren of sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant had any implied contractual duty to repair the premises.
  Judgment affirmed.
instruction: 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)", specifically "financial institution". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: bank insurance savings and loan credit union other pension fund other financial institution or investment company unclear