Henry Woodlief, Sr. v. Felipe Tzoc-Ortiz, United Security Insurance Company
Henry Woodlief, Sr. v. Felipe Tzoc-Ortiz, United Security Insurance Company, No. 2026 CW 0790 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. Sept. 21, 2026).
Opinion text
all
Office Of The Clerk
Court of Appeal, First Circuit
State of Louisiana
www.la- feca. org
Rodd Naquin Post Office Box 4408
Clerk of Court Baton Rouge, LA
70821- 4408
Notice of Judgment and Disposition 225) 382- 3000
September 21, 2026
Docket Number: 2026 - CW - 0790
Henry Woodlief, Sr.
versus
Felipe Tzoc-Ortiz, United Security Insurance Company D/ B/ A
United Security Health & Casualty Ins. Company
TO: Scott A. Cannon Shannon M. Livermore
122 Village Street 122 Village Street
Slidell, LA 70458 Slidell, LA 70458
scannon@cannon- law. net slivermore@cannon- law. net
Venese Morgan Hon. Donald R. Johnson
412 N. 4th St., 300 North Boulevard
Ste. 102 Suite 8401
Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Baton Rouge, LA 70801
VIA EMAIL
In accordance with Local Rule 6 of the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, I hereby certify that this notice of judgment and
disposition and the attached disposition were Iran This date to the trial jud a or equivalent, all counsel of record,
and all parties not represented by counsel.
CLERK OF COURT
HENRY WOODLIEF, SR. NO. 2026 CW 0790
VERSUS
FELIPE TZOC- ORTIZ, UNITED
SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY
D/ B/ A UNITED SECURITY HEALTH SEPTEMBER 21, 2026
CASUALTY INS. COMPANY
In Re: United Security Insurance Company d/ b/ a United Security
Health & Casualty Ins. Co., applying for supervisory
writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East
Baton Rouge, No. 749888.
BEFORE: PENZATO, LANIER, AND FIELDS, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. " A summary judgment may be rendered or affirmed
only as to those issues set forth in the motion under consideration
by the court at that time." La. Code Civ. P. art. 966( F). Herein,
the relator, United Security Insurance Company D/ B/ A United
Security Health & Casualty Ins. Co., did not set forth any
additional issues beyond the issue of coverage in its motion for
summary judgment. Based upon the procedural posture of the case,
the plaintiff' s allegations of bad faith were not pending at the
time the motion for summary judgment was filed.
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
DEPUTY
L; ILCLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT