Select Financial LLC v. Penland Financial Services, In, No. 08-1426 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1426 SELECT FINANCIAL LLC, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PENLAND FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.; CHARLES W. PENLAND, SR., Guardian ad Litem, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (7:05-cv-02647-GRA) Submitted: March 11, 2009 Decided: March 27, 2009 Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles W. Penland, Sr., Appellant Anthony, Jr., THE ANTHONY LAW FIRM, Carolina, for Appellee. Pro PA, Se. Kenneth C. Spartanburg, South Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charles W. Penland, Sr., appeals the district court s order that granted Plaintiff s motions for summary judgment, sanctions, and dismissal of the counterclaim filed against it; relieved Jean Bradley, the court-appointed guardian ad litem, of her duties; denied Penland s three motions to dismiss, motion for summary judgment, motion for the disbarment of an attorney and to hold Plaintiff and Bradley in contempt of court, and motion to compel information; and granted a non-party leave to provide a limited response. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral 54(b); Cohen (1949). order orders, v. 28 U.S.C. Beneficial § 1292 Indus. (2006); Loan Fed. Corp., R. 337 Civ. U.S. P. 541 The order Penland seeks to appeal is neither a final nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We further deny Penland s motion for an en banc hearing on this matter as no judge has called for a vote on whether an en banc hearing should be permitted. dispense with oral argument See Fed. R. App. P. 35(f). because the facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.