Snyder v. Phelps-Roper, No. 07-6968 (4th Cir. 2007)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6968 ALBERT SNYDER, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SHIRLEY L. PHELPS-DAVIS, PHELPS-ROPER; REBEKAH A. Defendants - Appellants, and FRED W. PHELPS, SR.; JOHN DOES; JANE DOES; WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:06-cv-01389-RDB) Submitted: October 31, 2007 Decided: December 4, 2007 Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, Rebekah A. Phelps-Davis, Appellants Pro Se. Sean E. Summers, Paul W. Minnich, Rees Griffiths, BARLEY & SNYDER, LLC, York, Pennsylvania; Craig T. Trebilcock, SHUMAKER & WILLIAMS, PC, York, Pennsylvania, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Rebekah A. Phelps-Davis and Shirley L. Phelps-Roper seek to appeal the district court s order denying their motion to dismiss or for summary judgment in Appellee s civil suit. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, we We further deny the Appellants renewed motion for stay, motion for emergency hearing, and motion for the district court to provide original audio tapes. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED - 3 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.