opinion: SARACENO’S MARKET, INC., Alleged Bankrupt, Appellant, v. HAFFENREFFER & CO., Inc., et al., Creditors, Appellees.
  No. 5669.
  United States Court of Appeals First Circuit.
  Oct. 18, 1960.
  Maurice H. Kramer, Boston, Mass., for appellant.
  Robert Robinson, Widett & Kruger, Boston, Mass., for appellees.
  Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and HARTIGAN and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges.
  PER CURIAM.
  In this case a debtor who admittedly committed an act of bankruptcy, namely, made a general assignment while owing three creditors more than $500, was petitioned into bankruptcy by said creditors. It pleads that the petition should be dismissed because the assignment was a more profitable way to dispose of the matter, and that the creditors signed the petition only because of poor advice given them by their attorneys, induced by the latters’ dislike of counsel for the as-signee and by a desire to obtain a fee. The district court ordered this special defense stricken.
  It may be assumed that in any case counsel hope for a fee. Were we to countenance this novel attempt to avoid bankruptcy proceedings that were admittedly appropriate and warranted, it would mean that in every instance the wisdom of the petitioning creditors and the reasons their counsel advised them to file would be the subject of inquiry. The case presented is a far cry from fraud.
  Judgment will be entered affirming the order of the District Court.
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 "trade". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: auto, auto parts, auto repairs chemical drug food oil, natural gas, gasoline textile, clothing electronic alcohol or tobacco general merchandise other  unclear