Charles Touchet v. United Specialty Insurance Company, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CHARLES TOUCHET CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO. 24-1020

UNITED SPECIALTY INSURANCE SECTION “R” (2) COMPANY, ET AL.

ORDER AND REASONS

Plaintiff Charles Touchet moves to strike1 the summary judgment reply brief of defendants Dorgelys Manzano Borrell and Alive Free Transportation.2 The district court must either give the other party an opportunity to respond or decline to rely on new arguments and evidence presented for the first time in a reply brief. Georgia Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. Anadarko Petroleum Corp., 99 F.4th 770, 774 (5th Cir. 2024). Here, Touchet asserts correctly that defendants’ reply brief presents new evidence and arguments. The reply brief includes an attachment A not previously provided to the Court and relies on the newly presented “independent evidence” in the attachment.3

1 R. Doc. 57. 2 R. Doc. 54. 3 Id. Accordingly, the Court grants Touchet an opportunity to respond to the

new arguments and evidence presented. The Court grants Touchet leave to file a sur-reply within seven days of this order to address the new arguments and evidence defendants present.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 9th day of January, 2026. _herak Varvee SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE