Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Checking Overdraft -- I Move to Strike Your Motion to Strike My Motion!

In light of the recent Supreme Court and 11th Circuit rulings on arbitration provisions, many of the checking overdraft bank defendants have asked Judge King to reconsider his rulings denying their motions to compel arbitration.

Naturally, the plaintiffs have responded like all good plaintiffs should -- by aggressively attacking the very motion to reconsider and moving to strike the reconsideration motion as improper.

Turns out, however, that it may be improper to move to strike a motion to reconsider as being improper:
No relief is available to Plaintiff under her Rule 12(f) Motion to Strike. First, and most important, a motion to strike applies only to pleadings, which does not include motions. See Santana v. RCSH Operations, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21814, *2–4 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2011); see also Croom v. Balkwill, 672 F. Supp. 2d 1280, 1285 (M.D. Fla. 2009) ("To object to the substance contained in a motion, the opposing party should raise such objections in the material it submits in opposition to the motion, rather than in a motion to strike."); Mann v. Darden, 2009 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 63044, *2 (M.D. Ala. July 6, 2009); Pimentel & Sons Guitar Makers, Inc. v. Pimentel, 229 F.R.D. 201, 203 (D.N.M. 2005) ("There is no provision in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for motions to strike motions and memoranda."); Phinney v. Paulshock, 181 F.R.D. 185, 207 (D.N.H. 1998); Weiss v. PPG Indus., Inc., 148 F.R.D. 289, 292 (M.D. Fla. 1993); 2-12 Moore's Federal Practice, Civil § 12.37 (2011) ("Only material included in a 'pleading' may be the subject of a motion to strike, and courts have been unwilling to construe the term broadly. Motions . . . may not be attacked by the motion to strike."). Plaintiff cites no authority to the contrary. Thus, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike BB&T's Renewed Motion is not permitted and the Court should deny the Motion to Strike for this reason alone.
I hope the plaintiffs reply by moving to strike the response to their motion to strike, which will be met with a motion to strike their motion to strike D's response to their motion to strike.

And then come the reconsideration motions.

Welcome to federal court!


Anonymous said...

I'd rather be arguing the finer points of Rule 12(f) via CM/ECF than being at state court motion calendar listening to the dirtbags yell at each other in the hall about their interrogatory responses.

swlip said...

There's a good lesson in here, somewhere. But now it's time to make lunch plans at La Loggia, which will primarily consist of sidling up to the bar around 11:45 am and buying a round of hard liquor for the nearest judge(s).

Haha. Just kidding.

Chicago Social Security Disability Lawyer said...

Thank you for sharing with us, I just bookmaked your blog for future reference and waiting for your new edition. Keep going, Thank again for sharing with us.

muebles lugo said...

It won't truly have success, I believe this way.

Anonymous said...

It's wonderful that you are getting ideas from this article as well as from our argument made at this place.
my web site > broker futures

Anonymous said...

Heуa i'm for the first time here. I came across this board and I find It really useful & it helped me out much. I hope to give something back and help others like you helped me.
Feel free to surf my web page :: samsung galaxy note 2