Midfirst Bank v. Berry et al

1 / 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
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).
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 09, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 2:25-cv-00072 Document 29 Filed on 12/09/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 3

2 / 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.
_______________________________
Jason B. Libby
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 2:25-cv-00072 Document 29 Filed on 12/09/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 3

3 / 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).
Case 2:25-cv-00072 Document 29 Filed on 12/09/25 in TXSD Page 3 of 3