The father of a Marine slain in Iraq has been ordered to pay the court costs of the odious Phelps clan:
Lawyers for the father of a Marine who died in Iraq and whose funeral was picketed by anti-gay protesters say a court has ordered him to pay the protesters’ appeal costs.
On Friday, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ordered that Albert Snyder of York, Pa., pay costs associated with Fred Phelps’ appeal. Phelps is the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church, which conducted protests at the funeral of Snyder’s son, Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, in Westminster in 2006.
Lawyers for Snyder say the Court of Appeals has ordered him to pay $16,510.80 to Phelps for costs relating to the appeal, despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the Court of Appeals’ decision.
I guess he hadn’t given enough.
I’ve seen significant movement on this already in a few on line communities. I don’t think the cash will be an issue, but this is infuriating. Of course it is how the Phelps have stayed in business for as long as they have as well. They go into these situations looking for this kind of thing.
You know he’s been doing this extreme right christianity god hates America because it tolerates gays shtick for well over a decade now. He’s been sued countless times. Gotta make you wonder who is funding him….
They fund themselves – through this kind of thing. Fred Phelps started the Phelps Chartered law firm and my understanding is that they pull in their money via litigation. He’s been disbarred and doesn’t practice any more but I think almost all his children are lawyers.
I assume for example in this case, that those fees will go to the Phelps, not to lawyers they hired.
There is an issue exposed here that isn’t directly related but I think about it a lot as I see it happening so often. Our legal system has become a weapon to use against others, whether one is right or wrong. Anyone with deep pockets can ruin someone else even if the party they attack is never proven to have done anything wrong. People with nothing to lose can also do this. I don’t know how it can be fixed but it’s very bothersome.
So his law firm funds his activities? The church only has 70 members of which about 50 are related to Phelps by blood or marriage. His daughters are his attorneys so I guess dad is their pro bono work. But there is a limit to funding all of that.
Well – as in this case, I’m sure their work for dad isn’t pro bono. The firm bills hours, and now Mr. Snyder pays them. That covers the costs of what they did and the rest goes into their coffers. I assume that 16 grand includes attorney’s fees.
They also sue anyone who does anything to them when they go out and do their thing. I imagine they lay awake at night hoping someone will punch them or do anything else that will ring up extra dollars in a civil case.
My reply to the court would be short and to the point;
” I’ll pay that money in Hell…”
I almost choked on that one.
What kind of world are we allowing to grow up around us?
Subsunk
Phelps is an annoying piece of you know what. I went to the Univ of Colorado Boulder and in the early 90s, after GW1, and before Phelps had the current war to use to his advantage, he and his people would come to Boulder and other regional college towns (they are in Kansas) to harass the locals. Speech may be free. But his version is certainly not pretty.
The law is an ass.
Or, in this case perhaps, the Court of Appeals …
This is sickening. Phelps may have the right to free speech, but does he have any human decency? If I were the Marine’s father, I would have ended up in jail on an assault charge. Or worse.
Or one could amend that statement to include the real source of the problem: State legislatures and Congress who write the laws whose wording is such that such “interpretations” are made possible….
Six of the sitting judges on the Fourth Circuit were appointed by Clinton and two by Obama.
Now I understand where those “interpretations” came from.
This matter, however infuriating it is to contemplate in the abstract, is far from being resolved…suggest it not be used as an excuse, not that some around here need any, to bash the law the courts and its practioners…as for disingenuously quoting Dickens out of contex…nothing more need be said. Best
A man called in his engineer, his accountant, and his lawyer and asked the question, “How much is 2+2?”
The engineer: within the limits of our measuring instruments, 2+2 is between 3.95 and 4.05.
The accountant: 4
The lawyer: How much do you want it to be?
Dickens aside, the law is an ass because its practitioners don’t give a hoot about right or wrong, guilt or innocence. They only care about the clever argument and the novel interpretation, and, of course, which outcome gives me the bigger fee. If we didn’t have lawyers, we wouldn’t need them.
Come off it, Chap.
That would be true of each and every lawyer on the face of the earth, right? Because we all KNOW they’re all the same.
Care to pick any another profession, find something you don’t like about or it some of its practicioners and smear all of them the same way too? I agree that does appear to be a donkey braying around here somewhere, though.
ChapS said the previous.
I’m just lurking.
Chaps, I caught that I lost the “s” after it was too late. But I did think it was you. I was wrong. My apologies.
Then again, I did succeed in de-lurking you.
99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Yeah, yeah, yeah … Is that really all you got?
Cuz it is starting to sound awful old and tired around here.
Note to Self:
Chap, Chap, Chap.
Not Chaps. Not Chaps.
Repeat.
Need more sleep.
Nice to see you defending the profession…alas you were AWOL last time ? Best
Tough job (particularly around here) but someone’s got to do it.
Last time?? I must admit I’m not quite as much of a regular at Chez Lex’s as I once was. Back when “regular” meant … ahem … several times a day. Every single day.
I do try to stick up for them lawyerly types when I can, though. Funny, I find you rarely chime in. Unless somebody says something to really
pissset your snark off, of course.Michelle, Please no snark intended…but about a week or so ago our host, as he did above, threw a bomb in the form of a post that incited the usual ME TOO suspects to commence a feeding frenzy of seemingly never ending lame/stupid lawyer jokes…it ultimately pissed me off to the point and I commented in kind… things got a little ugly all around but that was it until today and my comment and the follow on comments at 8:24AM above were the predicitable results.
This time you and Spencer joined the fray… Thanks again to you both. Best
Oh, that one.
I only read the initial few comments on that thread so I missed all the fun.
Lawyer jokes tend not to bother that much though (maybe I am just so use to hearing them and I must admit, I have told a few myself) unless and until they go on. And on. And on. Much like dumb blonde jokes.
I hate to say this (and never thought I would) but the comments around here have gotten rather predictably … pathetic lately when it comes to this subject. If they’re gonna try and pillar the lawyers, you would think they might at least come up with something a little more original to offer than the same old, tired crap. It kind of reminds me of somethig my mom use to say – something about those who have to put others down in order to build themselves up. We all know how well that works, eh?
One night be inclined to wonder why this so predictably occurs lately when it’s well-known that some of Lex’s more faithful and long-time readers might (justifiably) get tired of being insulted. It seems to me that we use to make more an effort to show respect for one another. Because that
wasis the kind of place this is. Or perhaps I’m just guilty of fondly misremembering the good old days.Yeah, yeah, I know, it’a all just in jest. And/or it’s totally deserved and people shouldn’t be so thin-skinned as to take offence. Try listening to it repeatedly about your career choice (and by extension, yourself, your friends and your co-workers) and see how well that one works for you. The funny thing is that for a crew that purports to be so smart you would think it wouldn’t be that much trouble to direct the comments towards the particular scum-sucking lawyers in question instead of at the whole profession.
Ok Chaps. Next time you are the victim of a crime, make sure you let the prosecutor know how you feel about the job he is doing getting the perp thrown in jail. Or when that drunk driver rear-ends you, ggod luck finding an attorney to get a recovery from the insurance company. How about buying or selling a house without an attorney at the closing. Good luck with that. I think you get my point.
Were you talking about me?
Q.E.D, Snake. Forty years ago this civil action wouldn’t have gotten past the first jury/judge. There is no excuse for this kind of crap, and your defense of such is pitiful. You’ve managed to snark yourself out of relevance, and fast on the road to finding yourself a bridge.
Byron,I strongly recommend that you re-read my comment with an open mind… especially focus on my point that this matter is far from being resolved…and thereafter kindly stuff your misinformed, salivating vituperation where the sun don’t shine… mindless mental masterbation ill suits you. Best
PS, Suggest that in the future you palce the “Q.E.D”, where it belongs, at the end of any comment.
Byron- when guys like Snake eater ask you to have an open mind, it means “agree with me or else.”
Agree, Chaps, he just went on my personal “ignore” list.
You and Chaps…now there’s dynamic set of bookends. Best
Snake, I’ll agree with you that not all lawyers are evil, corrupt, money-grubbing parasites. I’ve known some attorneys with good character indeed.
But I’ve also been burned and forced out of practice by attorneys who enable patients of poor character, in multiple lawsuits, with the attitude, “Well a bad thing happened to me, and you have insurance, and we think you should pay, even though we don’t hold it against you personally.” To the point in my last lawsuit that the moment the attorney found I was quitting practice and did not buy “tail coverage”, he dropped the already filed suit like a hot potato.
And I have many friends with similar experiences, in and out of the profession of medicine. So what is your advice? To regard lawyers with the same nobility of purpose in which I regard nurses? It seems unlikely that certain occupations have certain reputations at random.
This was a fascinating read. While very late to the game I just had to throw my 2 cents in to support the so quickly ignored point made by Bill K. and Chaps that while there is a segment of the profession of law that dutifully works to bring justice to our society, there is a much larger, more obnoxious, and significantly more visible segment so focused on their own fame and fortune that they have eclipsed the core meaning of justice and perverted our legal system. We now have a system so convoluted, complex that it has become completely incomprehensible to the common man. Should not the common person be able to effectively defend themselves in any action brought before the court?
Help me to understand please, as the article is unclear.
What are the fees Phelps incurred coming from? Did Mr. Snyder sue Phelps, win then have that verdict overturned?
Either way though it doesn’t matter. The only thing Mr. Snyder owes Phelps is something that is likely considered to be illegal.
A good read -
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/snyder-v-phelps
Mr. Snyder sued and won like 20 million, which was later reduced to 3 million.
The WBC is appealing the verdict on 1st amendment rights.
it is the appeals costs that Mr. Snyder is being forced to pay.
Since SCOTUS has agreed to review, I don’t think the family has to pay anything until the outcome of the review. That those morons would rule that they have to pay the Phelps, however, is unacceptable. Judges, alas, are lawless.
If not mistaken, Phelps (disbarred), his daughters Rebekah and Shirley, and the counsel for Fred Phelps’s appeal brfore the Fourth Circuit, Margie Jean Phelps, are also law school graduates.
To the average citizen, extortion regularly and legally practiced by too many lawyers is precisely why the law is often an ass.
angry
The Mudville Gazette milblog has links to the memorial website for Lance Corporal Snyder, a Facebook page offering support and to an American Legion blog. I believe all of those give you some way you can contribute to help Albert Snyder fund his fight against these pieces of whale dung that have the temerity to call themselves Christians.
Whale dung, amen. “For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit…Why do you call Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?” And again,
“Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence – things apparently absent in the Phelps.
Via Blackfive The American Legion has Stepped up in a big way.
Roachman beat me to it. My donation to the American Legion goes in today.
Proud to be one of the newest members of the American Legion.
With all due respect to the dead Mr. Snyder, fired the first shot in court by filing a lawsuit against Phelps and Westboro. To demonize all lawyers because Mr. Snyder chose to sue and partially lost is going a bit far in my opinion.
Snyder’s complaint alleged five state law tort claims, three of which are implicated in this appeal: invasion of privacy by intrusion upon seclusion, intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”), and civil conspiracy.
In the end Mr. Snyder won a judgement against Phelps for $2.9 million plus punitive damages of $8 million which were reduced to $2.1 million. Mr. Snyder admits not seeing the signs during the funeral. He saw them later on TV and he found the church’s website which compelled him to sue. During the trial the court found that certain signs the Phelps people used as well as postings on their website singled out Snyder’s son.
Phelps asked for relief and eventually appealed the case and it sounds like the Supremes are planning on hearing it. SCOTUS has held in the past that not all speech is free. Phelp’s and his people did not break any laws in this case and complied with all police and city requirements staying in their exclusion zone. However, this case is not about municipal or state law as much as it is about a personal injury civil case. This case “involves balancing [the Defendants’ First Amendment rights of religious expression] with the rights of other private citizens to avoid being verbally assaulted by outrageous speech and comment during a time of bereavement and there “was sufficient evidence in the trial record for a reasonable jury to conclude that Defendants’ conduct was so extreme and outrageous as to cause Plaintiff’s injury. The court also rejected the Defendants’ post-trial contention that the court “should have held as a matter of law that [the Defendants] were entitled to First Amendment protection.
The Supremes have limited the First Amendment in the past in civil cases involving two parties and no government entities. There is a lot to look at with this one. At stake is the broader theme of gross application of the First Amendment possibly protecting phelps; the application of where the First Amendment ends and Snyder’s personal injury begins. They can also review the amounts of the judgement and reduce it. If they let the order stand Phelps still has to pay close $5,000,000 to Snyder with or without the court fees of $16,000. think, given the current composition of SCOTUS, that Snyder might win here and Phelps might have to pay.
Spencer, Hopefully your knowledgable and thoughtful comments will serve to dissuade the shoot from the hip, rush to judgement, knuckle draggers around here from commenting on a matter until all the facts are in play. Many thanks. Best
I am willing to wait and see what the final outcome of this is, before I get upset about it. Law is an honorable profession, the acts of a few notwithstanding. As a Badger, I may catch the weasels, but it the lawyers that put them away.
Mr. Badger, we could ally ourselves against weasels. Dachshunds like to catch weasels too. Just be sure to keep me busy or I might get the wrong idea. Dachshunds have a notoriously short attention span.
Keep on eye on this link for a possible way to help (they’re still nailing down the details of the situation): http://burnpit.legion.org/2010/03/put-yourself-in-his-dad%E2%80%99s-shoes/
The law is not the “ass” in this case. The law is blameless, the blame lies with the pond scum sucking brand of lawyer that launches a tirade in the name of freedom while standing on the graves of those that died to give them that freedom. Freedom swings both ways – free to ____ and free not to ____.
I know some retired Navy SEALS down this way that are always on for a little H&I.
Bobble – thank you for the link above. I find this passage very interesting:
The defendants’ practice of protesting at the funerals of fallen soldiers is infamous, and Congress passed a federal statue on May 29, 2006 that prohibits protests of the sort involved in this case.
Given that Congress has deemed it so offensive they passed a federal statute on the subject, can’t that be used in arguments on behalf of the Snyders? I know it was passed after their son’s funeral but that has to speak volumes to how truly heinous Phelps and his band of merry haters really are.
Or I’m just that naive.
1. Sturgeon’s Law applies to lawyers.
2. Remember that scene in “The Sand Pebbles” at the boom, when Jake Holman has already killed a buncha folks in a desperate fight, and seen hi shipmates die beside him, and he meets That Guy, and happens to have an axe in his hands…