Ashley v. Boayue
Ashley v. Boayue
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION CARL LEE ASHLEY, Plaintiff, Case No. 19-cv-10484 HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH MARY BOAYUE, Defendant. / ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFE’S MOTION TO LIFT STAY (Dkt. 123) This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Carl Ashley’s motion to lift stay and to set date for settlement conference or trial (Dkt. 123). Ashley’s motion argues that the Court’s order granting Chapman Law Group’s motion to withdraw (Dkt. 121) warrants lifting the stay because “Defendant [Mary] Boayue is no longer being represented by Corizon representatives ... .” Mot. at 2. The Court previously denied Ashley’s prior motion to lift the stay on this case due to the pendency of the bankruptcy filing by Tehum Care Services, Inc., d/b/a Corizon Health, Inc. See 3/28/24 Order (Dkt. 122). While the Court acknowledges that Chapman Law Group no longer represents Boayue—who is a Corizon Health insured—the pendency of the bankruptcy filing Corizon may nonetheless impact the Boayue’s representation in this case. The Court sees no reason to lift the stay at this juncture. See F.T.C. v. E.M.A. Nationwide, Inc.,
767 F.3d 611, 626-627(6th Cir. 2014) (“The power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes in its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel and for litigants, and the entry of such an order ordinarily rests with the
sound discretion of the [d]istrict [cJourt.”). The Court will continue to monitor developments in the pending bankruptcy proceeding and the resulting impact on this case. Ashley’s motion to lift the stay and to set a date for settlement conference or trial (Dkt. 123) is denied. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 7, 2025 s/Mark A. Goldsmith Detroit, Michigan MARK A. GOLDSMITH United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown