IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

TERRY HESTER, et al., )

)
Plaintiffs, )
)
) CIVIL ACTION NO.
v. ) 2:09cv908-MHT
)
REGIONS BANK, et al., )
)
Defendants. )

PLAINTIFFS’S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT REGIONS BANK’S

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY BRIEF AND PLAINTIFFS’S
ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REBUTTAL
TO DEFENDANT REGIONS BANK’S REPLY BRIEF.

Come the Plaintiffs in the above styled cause, and, in response to

Defendant Regions Bank’s Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief filed November

23, 2009, object to Region Bank’s motion and move this Court as follows:

I. THIS COURT SHOULD DENY REGIONS BANK’S BELATED MOTION

FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY BRIEF.

On November 13, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their initial response to Defendant

Regions Bank’s Motion to Dismiss. One business day later on November 16,

2009, Plaintiffs filed their Supplemental Response to Defendant Regions Bank’s

Motion to Dismiss. Because Defendant Regions Bank did not file its Motion for

1
Leave to File Reply Brief (along with the related reply brief) until the afternoon of

November 23, 2009, the Plaintiff’s, in order to preserve the record, hereby move

this Court to deny Defendant Regions Bank’s Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief

as untimely or belatedly filed. Plaintiffs also move this court to strike the related

reply brief from the record.

II. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PLAINTIFFS MOVE THIS COURT FOR LEAVE

TO FILE A REBUTTAL TO DEFENDANT REGIONS BANK’S REPLY
BRIEF.

Should this Court grant Defendant Regions Bank’s Motion for Leave to File

Reply Brief, Plaintiffs, in the alternative, move this Court for leave to file a rebuttal

to Defendant Region Bank’s reply brief. As grounds for their Motion for Leave to

File Rebuttal, Plaintiffs assert that they wholly and vigorously disagree with

Defendant Regions Bank’s interpretation and/or misinterpretation of federal

statutes and regulations that are important to the determination of jurisdiction in

this case. Should these interpretations/misinterpretations stand without rebuttal,

this Court’s eventual ruling might not be fully informed, and, hence, a miscarriage

of justice could result. Furthermore, Plaintiffs also take issue with Defendant

Regions Bank’s representation of certain allegations in Plaintiffs’s complaint and

certain arguments made in Plaintiffs’s Supplemental Response. Plaintiffs

particularly take issue with certain “conclusions” of “fact” Regions Bank asserts in

its reply brief, conclusions that are appropriate only for this Court’s determination.

Finally, Plaintiffs note that, via Defendant Regions Bank’s Motion for Leave, it

2
has engaged in unjustified rhetorical tactics that border on personal attacks.

Plaintiffs seek to respond to these tactics, yet do so in a manner most civil.

In summary, given that, in certain respects, Defendant Regions Bank’s

reply brief serves as the equivalent of a new motion to dismiss; Plaintiffs submit

that it would serve the ends of justice and due process for this Court to grant

Plaintiffs’s Motion for Leave to File Rebuttal.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs hereby move this Court to deny Defendant

Regions Bank’s Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief as untimely or belatedly filed

and to strike the related reply brief from the record. In the alternative, Plaintiffs

move this Court to grant Plaintiffs’s Motion for Leave to File Rebuttal.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Hense R. Ellis II
Counsel for Plaintiffs

Hense R. Ellis II
Hense R. Ellis II, LLC
800 Lay Dam Road
Clanton, AL 35045
(205) 755-2223
3
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on November 24, 2009, a copy of the above and the

foregoing has been electronically filed with the Clerk for the Middle District of

Alabama and also served upon the following listed persons by electronic service

through the CM/ECF court filing system:

Randall D. Quarles, Esq., Frances P. Quarles, Esq.

Attorney for Defendant Regions Bank
Quarles Law Firm, LLC
Post Office Box 1567
Birmingham, Alabama 35201

John W. Scott, Kimberly W. Geisler

Attorneys for Defendant Bank of America, N.A.
SCOTT DUKES & GEISLER, P.C.
2100 Third Avenue North, Suite 700
Birmingham, Alabama 35203

Victor L. Hayslip, Kip A. Nesmith, Walker S. Stewart

Counsel for Defendant Wachovia Bank
BURR & FORMAN LLP
3400 Wachovia Tower, 420 North 20th Street
Birmingham, Alabama 35203

John R. Chiles, Matthew Mitchell

Counsel for Defendant Citibank
BURR & FORMAN LLP
3400 Wachovia Tower, 420 North 20th Street
Birmingham, Alabama 35203

/s/Hense R. Ellis II
Hense R. Ellis II

Hense R. Ellis II
Hense R. Ellis II, LLC
800 Lay Dam Road
Clanton, AL 35045
(205) 755-2223