COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2017
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES	NOTE 16 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES The nature of the Company’s business ordinarily results in a certain amount of claims, litigation, investigations and legal and administrative cases and proceedings. Although the Company and its subsidiaries have developed policies and procedures to minimize the impact of legal noncompliance and other disputes, and endeavored to provide reasonable insurance coverage, litigation and regulatory actions present an ongoing risk. The Company and its subsidiaries are engaged in lines of business that are heavily regulated and involve a large volume of financial transactions and potential transactions with numerous customers or applicants, and the Company is a public company with a large number of shareholders. From time to time, borrowers, customers, shareholders, former employees and other third parties have brought actions against the Company or its subsidiaries, in some cases claiming substantial damages. Financial services companies are subject to the risk of class action litigation and, from time to time, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to such actions brought against it. Additionally, the Bank is, and management expects it to be, engaged in a number of foreclosure proceedings and other collection actions as part of its lending and leasing collections activities, which, from time to time, have resulted in counterclaims against the Bank. Various legal proceedings have arisen and may arise in the future out of claims against entities to which the Company is a successor as a result of business combinations. The Company and its subsidiaries may also be subject to enforcement actions by federal or state regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”), the Department of Justice (the “DOJ”), state attorneys general and the Mississippi Department of Banking and Consumer Finance. When and as the Company determines it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted, it vigorously defends against such claims. The Company will consider settlement of claims when, in management’s judgment and in consultation with counsel, it is in the best interests of the Company to do so. The Company cannot predict with certainty the cost of defense, the cost of prosecution or the ultimate outcome of litigation and other proceedings filed by or against it, its directors, management or employees, including remedies or damage awards. On at least a quarterly basis, the Company assesses its liabilities and contingencies in connection with outstanding legal proceedings as well as certain threatened claims (which are not considered incidental to the ordinary conduct of the Company’s business) utilizing the latest and most reliable information available. For matters where a loss is not probable or the amount of the loss cannot be estimated, no accrual is established. For matters where it is probable the Company will incur a loss and the amount can be reasonably estimated, the Company establishes an accrual for the loss. Once established, the accrual is adjusted periodically to reflect any relevant developments. The actual cost of any outstanding legal proceedings and the potential loss, however, may turn out to be substantially higher than the amount accrued. Further, the Company’s insurance policies have deductibles and they will likely not cover all such litigation, other proceedings or claims, or the costs of defense. While the final outcome of any legal proceedings is inherently uncertain, based on the information available, advice of counsel and available insurance coverage, if applicable, management believes that the litigation-related expense of $2.9 million accrued as of March 31, 2017, which excludes amounts reserved for regulatory settlement expenses discussed below, is adequate and that any incremental liability arising from the Company’s legal proceedings and threatened claims, including the matters described herein and those otherwise arising in the ordinary course of business, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's business or consolidated financial condition. It is possible, however, that future developments could result in an unfavorable outcome for or resolution of any one or more of the lawsuits in which the Company or its subsidiaries are defendants, which may be material to the Company’s results of operations for a particular fiscal period or periods. On July 31, 2014, the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and former Chief Financial Officer were named in a purported class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of certain purchasers of the Company’s common stock. The complaint was subsequently amended to add the former President and Chief Operating Officer. The complaint alleges that the defendants made misleading statements concerning the Company’s expectation that it would be able to close two merger transactions within a specified time period and the Company’s compliance with certain Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering requirements. On July 10, 2015, the District Court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the claims concerning the Company’s expectations about the closing of the mergers. Class certification was granted by the District Court on April 21, 2016, and a petition for immediate appeal of the class certification was filed and was granted. Class certification was vacated by the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the case was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings. The plaintiff seeks an unspecified amount of damages and awards of costs and attorneys’ fees and such other equitable relief as the District Court may deem just and proper. At this stage of the lawsuit, management cannot determine the probability of an unfavorable outcome to the Company as it is uncertain whether the lead plaintiff will be successful in certifying a class on its second attempt and the exact amount of damages (should the District Court grant class certification again) is uncertain. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate resolution or financial liability with respect to the litigation, management is currently of the opinion that the outcome of this lawsuit will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations. On June 29, 2016, the Bank, the CFPB and the DOJ agreed to a settlement set forth in a consent order (the “Consent Order”) related to the joint investigation by the CFPB and the DOJ of the Bank’s fair lending program during the period between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013. The Consent Order was signed by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (the “District Court”) on July 25, 2016. In the first quarter of 2016, the Bank reserved $13.8 million to cover costs related to this matter, $10.3 million of which was reflected as regulatory settlement expense and $3.5 million of which was included in other noninterest expense. The settlement of this matter did not have a material financial impact on the second and third quarter 2016 financial results. For additional information regarding the terms of this settlement and the Consent Order, see the signed Consent Order and the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K that was filed with the SEC on June 29, 2016 which are incorporated herein by reference.

NOTE 16 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES

The nature of the Company’s business ordinarily results in a certain amount of claims, litigation, investigations and legal and administrative cases and proceedings. Although the Company and its subsidiaries have developed policies and procedures to minimize the impact of legal noncompliance and other disputes, and endeavored to provide reasonable insurance coverage, litigation and regulatory actions present an ongoing risk.

The Company and its subsidiaries are engaged in lines of business that are heavily regulated and involve a large volume of financial transactions and potential transactions with numerous customers or applicants, and the Company is a public company with a large number of shareholders. From time to time, borrowers, customers, shareholders, former employees and other third parties have brought actions against the Company or its subsidiaries, in some cases claiming substantial damages. Financial services companies are subject to the risk of class action litigation and, from time to time, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to such actions brought against it. Additionally, the Bank is, and management expects it to be, engaged in a number of foreclosure proceedings and other collection actions as part of its lending and leasing collections activities, which, from time to time, have resulted in counterclaims against the Bank. Various legal proceedings have arisen and may arise in the future out of claims against entities to which the Company is a successor as a result of business combinations. The Company and its subsidiaries may also be subject to enforcement actions by federal or state regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”), the Department of Justice (the “DOJ”), state attorneys general and the Mississippi Department of Banking and Consumer Finance.

When and as the Company determines it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted, it vigorously defends against such claims. The Company will consider settlement of claims when, in management’s judgment and in consultation with counsel, it is in the best interests of the Company to do so.

The Company cannot predict with certainty the cost of defense, the cost of prosecution or the ultimate outcome of litigation and other proceedings filed by or against it, its directors, management or employees, including remedies or damage awards. On at least a quarterly basis, the Company assesses its liabilities and contingencies in connection with outstanding legal proceedings as well as certain threatened claims (which are not considered incidental to the ordinary conduct of the Company’s business) utilizing the latest and most reliable information available. For matters where a loss is not probable or the amount of the loss cannot be estimated, no accrual is established. For matters where it is probable the Company will incur a loss and the amount can be reasonably estimated, the Company establishes an accrual for the loss. Once established, the accrual is adjusted periodically to reflect any relevant developments. The actual cost of any outstanding legal proceedings and the potential loss, however, may turn out to be substantially higher than the amount accrued. Further, the Company’s insurance policies have deductibles and they will likely not cover all such litigation, other proceedings or claims, or the costs of defense.

While the final outcome of any legal proceedings is inherently uncertain, based on the information available, advice of counsel and available insurance coverage, if applicable, management believes that the litigation-related expense of $2.9 million accrued as of March 31, 2017, which excludes amounts reserved for regulatory settlement expenses discussed below, is adequate and that any incremental liability arising from the Company’s legal proceedings and threatened claims, including the matters described herein and those otherwise arising in the ordinary course of business, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's business or consolidated financial condition. It is possible, however, that future developments could result in an unfavorable outcome for or resolution of any one or more of the lawsuits in which the Company or its subsidiaries are defendants, which may be material to the Company’s results of operations for a particular fiscal period or periods.

On July 31, 2014, the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and former Chief Financial Officer were named in a purported class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of certain purchasers of the Company’s common stock. The complaint was subsequently amended to add the former President and Chief Operating Officer. The complaint alleges that the defendants made misleading statements concerning the Company’s expectation that it would be able to close two merger transactions within a specified time period and the Company’s compliance with certain Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering requirements. On July 10, 2015, the District Court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the claims concerning the Company’s expectations about the closing of the mergers. Class certification was granted by the District Court on April 21, 2016, and a petition for immediate appeal of the class certification was filed and was granted. Class certification was vacated by the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the case was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings. The plaintiff seeks an unspecified amount of damages and awards of costs and attorneys’ fees and such other equitable relief as the District Court may deem just and proper. At this stage of the lawsuit, management cannot determine the probability of an unfavorable outcome to the Company as it is uncertain whether the lead plaintiff will be successful in certifying a class on its second attempt and the exact amount of damages (should the District Court grant class certification again) is uncertain. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate resolution or financial liability with respect to the litigation, management is currently of the opinion that the outcome of this lawsuit will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations.

On June 29, 2016, the Bank, the CFPB and the DOJ agreed to a settlement set forth in a consent order (the “Consent Order”) related to the joint investigation by the CFPB and the DOJ of the Bank’s fair lending program during the period between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013. The Consent Order was signed by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (the “District Court”) on July 25, 2016. In the first quarter of 2016, the Bank reserved $13.8 million to cover costs related to this matter, $10.3 million of which was reflected as regulatory settlement expense and $3.5 million of which was included in other noninterest expense. The settlement of this matter did not have a material financial impact on the second and third quarter 2016 financial results. For additional information regarding the terms of this settlement and the Consent Order, see the signed Consent Order and the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K that was filed with the SEC on June 29, 2016 which are incorporated herein by reference.