Order | Filed: July 07, 2026
| Entered: July 07, 2026
Wilmington Trust Company v. Neary
Contract: Negotiable Instrument | Texas Northern
Order on Motion to Reopen Case
ELECTRONIC ORDER Reopening Case:
Before the Court is Plaintiff Wilmington Trust Company's Second Update to Joint Status Report and Motion to Restore Action to the Active Docket (the "Motion") (Doc. No. 49), Defendant Michael L. Neary's Response and Opposition to Wilmington Trust Company's Motion (the "Response") (Doc. No. 51), and Plaintiff Wilmington Trust Company's Reply in Support of the Motion (the "Reply") (Doc. No. 53). Plaintiff requests that the Court lift the stay on this case and reopen the same. Doc. No. 49 at 1; see also Doc. No. 35 (Court's August 13, 2025, order staying case). In the Court's order staying this matter, it also vacated all deadlines and the trial date set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order in force at the time. See Doc. No. 35. Plaintiff argues that "it should not be required to hold its claims in abeyance as a precondition to continued settlement discussions." Doc. No. 53 at 8.
Having carefully considered the Motion, the Response, and the Reply, as well as the applicable law and relevant portions of the record, the Court agrees with Plaintiff that, given the current circumstances presented in the parties' briefing, lifting the stay and reopening this matter at this stage is appropriate. Accordingly, the Court, in its discretion, GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion and hereby LIFTS THE STAY and REOPENS this case on the Court's active docket. Because this case previously proceeded on a scheduling order (Doc. Nos. 20 & 31), the Court does not need the parties to confer about new deadlines. Rather, the Court will enter a separate scheduling order setting forth the remaining pretrial deadlines and trial date. Importantly, the Court notes that it will NOT reset any deadlines that had already expired when the parties initially notified the Court that settlement was likely. See Doc. No. 34 (parties' joint motion to stay deadlines). In other words, the Court will only reset deadlines that were still pending at that time.
Further, the Court is in receipt of Defendant's Opposed Motion for Leave to File Original Counterclaim (the "Motion for Leave"). In light of the Court's ruling herein, the Court EXPEDITES the briefing on the Motion for Leave as follows:
Plaintiff shall file its response in opposition to the Motion for Leave by July 14, 2026.
Defendant may file his reply in support of the Motion for Leave by July 17, 2026.
(Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 7/7/2026) (chmb)