MidFirst Bank v. Brandi Berry, et al.

• Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
• Decided: December 9, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00072
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT December 09, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

MIDFIRST BANK, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00072 § BRANDI BERRY, et al., § § Defendants. §

MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pending is a Joint Motion for Entry of Second Amended Agreed Order as to the Interests of Minors G.S. and B.S. (D.E. 28). This Motion has been referred to the undersigned. (D.E. 17).1 Jeanette Cantu-Bazar has been appointed as guardian ad litem. In both the Motion and at hearings held before the undersigned, the parties reported they have reached an agreement to resolve this dispute and have submitted an agreed order. (D.E. 28-1). This proposed order addresses the undersigned’s previous concerns. (D.E. 25). Having reviewed the Motion and the proposed agreed order, the undersigned RECOMMENDS it be granted and the proposed order be entered. (D.E. 28 and D.E. 28-

1The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to update the docket to reflect that only the Motion, not the entire case, has been referred to the undersigned. (D.E. 17). 1 / 3 1). The undersigned notes outstanding mortgage balances, fees and costs are subject to being reviewed and approved by the Court in subsequent motion practice. ORDERED on December 9, 2025.

C Jason & Libby Z United States Magistrate Judge

2/3

NOTICE TO PARTIES The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the

United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and Article IV, General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. A party’s failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation within

FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

3 / 3