opinion: TRANSIT CASUALTY COMPANY et al., Appellants, v. SECURITY TRUST COMPANY et al., Appellees.
  No. 25249.
  United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
  June 28, 1968.
  Rehearing Denied Aug. 29, 1968.
  Paul R. Larkin, Jr., Samuel J. Powers, Jr., James E. Tribble, Blackwell, Walker & Gray, Miami, Fla., for appellants.
  James A. Dixon, Miami, Fla., Brooks P. Hoyt, Tampa, Fla., Reginald L. Williams, Sam Daniels, Dixon, DeJarnette, Bradford, Williams, McKay & Kimbrell, Miami, Fla., for appellees.
  Before WISDOM and COLEMAN, Circuit Judges, and COMISKEY, District Judge.
  PER CURIAM:
  The appellants brought this suit as a class action. Before the court reached a determination of appellants’ right to maintain this suit as a class action, the district judge ordered appellants to “amend their complaints so as to include ' as parties plaintiff all members of the alleged class who have retained counsel for the plaintiffs to represent them in these two cases.” Ten months later the district judge dismissed appellants’ suit with prejudice when appellants failed to comply with this order. Rule 41(b) F.R.Civ.P.
  We agree with the order of dismissal by the district court, but vacate that part of the order making the dismissal with prejudice and remand with instructions to enter the order without prejudice.
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