Select Financial LLC v. Penland Financial Services, In

Filing 920090327

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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); (1949). order orders, v. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 Indus. (2006); Loan Fed. R. Civ. U.S. P. 541

Cohen

Beneficial

Corp.,

337

The order Penland seeks to appeal is neither a final nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

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