Elizabeth Erny Foote
How Judge Foote rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Foote
Elizabeth Erny Foote is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Foote received a commission on June 15, 2010. Judge Foote assumed senior status on January 21, 2022.
Judge Foote's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Foote, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Senior Judge Elizabeth Erny Foote ↗
- Guidelines for Submission of Exhibits for Judge Foote ↗
- Rule 26(f) Case Management Report ↗
- Pretrial Order Form ↗
Key rules
Filing
Email Word courtesy copies of motions and responses when filed; deliver an additional paper copy if the filing exceeds 50 pages.
“Judge Foote requires courtesy copies of ex-parte and contested motions, supporting memorandum, and responses to be e-mailed simultaneous with the filing to: [email protected] This courtesy copy should be in Word format. Additionally, if the filing exceeds 50 pages, it should also be delivered to chambers at the address indicated above.”
Trial
Submit two paper copies of trial exhibits in three-ring binders during the week before trial.
“Counsel shall submit two paper copies of trial exhibits to Chambers the week prior to the trial. Paper copies shall be submitted in three-ring binders.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
- General Order 0001-2025: Procedures for Access and Management of Sealed or Restricted Documents ↗
- General Order 0001-2024: Procedures for Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- SO 1.74 Service and Scheduling of Immigration Habeas Cases ↗
- SO 1.75 Regarding Third-Party Litigation Funding ↗
How Judge Foote decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Faulk, Foote found a trialworthy retaliation dispute based on different treatment of a similarly situated coworker, departures from the medical center’s procedures, and the employee’s disciplinary history; she granted summary judgment on the separate discrimination claim.
“Thus, as evidence of pretext, Plaintiff has alleged varying treatment between herself and her similarly situated co-worker, the violation of the medical center’s own policies and procedures, and has presented evidence of an employment record devoid of prior disciplinary action.”
Procedural preferences
In J & L Family, Foote granted partial summary judgment against a demand for attorney fees tied to alleged tort misrepresentation because the Louisiana tort provision did not authorize them.
“Because Article 2315 does not expressly provide for attorney fees, Louisiana courts have held that attorney fees are not available in tort actions.”
Cautions
In Eagle Water, Foote held that preventive sewer repairs did not trigger a liability policy requiring the insured to become legally obligated to pay third-party damages.
“Under the plain language of the instant contract, it is undisputed that Eagle Water never became ‘legally obligated to pay’ anyone because of the collapsed manhole.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Because the Court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact concerning Plaintiffs discrimination claim, summary judgment is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs discrimination claim. Because the Court finds that there are genuine issues of material fact concerning whether Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for participation in protected activities, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED as to Plaintiffs retaliation claim.”
“Therefore, in light of the foregoing, the Court GRANTS BHP's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, [Record Document 48], on each claim raised in its motion: (1) J & L's claim for penalties and attorney fees under La. R.S. 31:212.21 -.23; (2) J & L's claim for contract fraud and associated attorney fees; (3) J & L's claim for attorney fees for tort fraud; and (4) J & L's claim for attorney fees under La. R.S. 31:212.31.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Doc. 8) and Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 9) are denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Arch's motion for summary judgment [Record Document 30] be and is hereby GRANTED . All of the Plaintiff's claims against the Defendant are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For these reasons, Willis-Knighton’s motion to dismiss [Record Document 20] is hereby GRANTED. UHS’s antitrust violations against Willis-Knighton are dismissed with prejudice.”
“TIG’s motion to dismiss [Record Document 18] is DENIED.”
“is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Board Members’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“[Record Document 701] is hereby DENIED.”
“For the reasons below, the motions [Record Documents 413 & 414] are DENIED.”
“For the reasons above, Defendants' motions for summary judgment [Record Documents 413 & 414] are DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' 13 motion to remand is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant Diane Wroten are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“For the forgoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion For Default Judgement is GRANTED.”
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 2 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 11 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 21 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 16 |
| Mar 2023 | 11 | 19 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 20 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 15 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 20 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 17 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 13 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, not for Judge Foote: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 1,541 | 13.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 287 | 8.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 832 | 13.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 398 | 16.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 24 | 27.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,541 | 13.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 3,194 | 16.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 3,966 | 10.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 3,186 | 8.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,330 | 8.6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,064 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,190 | 11.5 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Foote with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Foote, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Foote's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace