opinion: CHASE RESORTS, INC., et al., Appellants, v. JOHNS-MANVILLE CORP., etc., et al., Appellees.
  No. 79-1823.
  United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
  Submitted April 16, 1980.
  Decided May 1, 1980.
  Dempster K. Holland, Thomas, Busse, Goodwin, Cullen, Clooney & Gibbons, St. Louis, Mo., for appellants.
  Eugene K. Buckley, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, Mo. (argued), and Carl D. Kraft, St. Louis, Mo., on brief, for appellees.
  Before HEANEY and ARNOLD, Circuit Judges, and SACHS, District Judge.
  The Hon. Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, sitting by designation.
  PER CURIAM.
  Chase Resorts, Inc., and Four Seasons Lakesites, Inc., brought this action against Johns-Manville Corporation and Johns-Man-ville Sales Corporation alleging breach of warranty and fraud in the sale of an automatic watering system for a golf course. The case was tried to the Court, the Hon. H. Kenneth Wangelin, Chief Judge, presiding. On June 29, 1979, Judge Wangelin made extensive findings of fact and conclusions of law favorable to defendants. The opinion is reported at 476 F.Supp. 633 (E.D. Mo.1979). Judgment was entered accordingly.
  We affirm on the basis of the District Court’s opinion. The Court found that Johns-Manville had not breached implied or express warranties and had not made fraudulent representations. These findings are supported by substantial evidence and are not clearly erroneous. See 8th Cir.R. 14.
  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 "other". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: medical clinics, health organizations, nursing homes, medical doctors, medical labs, or other private health care facilities private attorney or law firm media - including magazines, newspapers, radio & TV stations and networks, cable TV, news organizations school - for profit private educational enterprise (including business and trade schools) housing, car, or durable goods rental or lease entertainment: amusement parks, race tracks, for profit camps, record companies, movie theaters and producers, ski resorts, hotels, restaurants, etc. information processing consulting security and/or maintenance service other service (including accounting) other (including a business pension fund) unclear