Jonathan Murray v. Universal Parking and Transportation, LLC

JONATHAN MURRAY * NO. 2024-CA-0787

VERSUS *
COURT OF APPEAL
UNIVERSAL PARKING AND *
TRANSPORTATION, LLC FOURTH CIRCUIT
*
STATE OF LOUISIANA
*******

APPEAL FROM
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH
NO. 2023-05534, DIVISION “B”
Honorable Marissa Hutabarat, Judge
******
Judge Dale N. Atkins
******
ON REHEARING
(Court composed of Judge Paula A. Brown, Judge Tiffany Gautier Chase, Judge
Dale N. Atkins)

Cesar R. Burgos
Robert J. Daigre
BURGOS & ASSOCIATES, LLC
3535 Canal Street
New Orleans, LA 70119

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT, Jonathan Murray

Matthew A. Sherman
Nicholas R. Varisco
CHEHARDY, SHERMAN, WILLIAMS, RECILE, & HAYES, L.L.P.
One Galleria Boulevard, Suite 1100
Metairie, LA 70001

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE, Universal Parking and
Transportation, LLC

LIMITED REHEARING GRANTED
OCTOBER 17, 2025

DNA

PAB

TGC

This Court, sua sponte, grants a limited rehearing in this matter to clarify a

reference to a case in our original Opinion issued on July 8, 2025. See Harper v.

Farmers’ & Merchants’ Nat’l Bank of Cambridge, 155 Md. 693, 142 A. 590, 592

(1928) (citation omitted).

In discussing the exception of lack of subject matter jurisdiction in our

original opinion, we cited to Jacobsen v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd., 2012-0655 (La. App.

5 Cir. 5/30/13), 119 So.3d 770, for the specific proposition regarding evidence

submitted at a contradictory hearing. We grant this limited rehearing to note that in

a recent Opinion issued by this Court, Senior v. Overlog, Inc., 2024-0541 (La.

App. 4 Cir. 4/21/25), 414 So.3d 965, we improperly followed Jacobsen in our

discussion of an exception of improper venue. Specifically, the Senior Opinion

cited Jacobsen as authority for holding that “[i]f there has been no contradictory

hearing [on an exception of improper venue], then the trial court does not err in

rendering judgment based upon the parties’ oral argument and the documents

attached to their memoranda . . . even if the parties did not introduce those

documents into evidence at the hearing.” 2024-0541, p. 9, 414 So.3d at 974

(citation omitted). Subsequently, we determined that Jacobsen does not stand for

1

the proposition enunciated in Senior; rather, according to Jacobsen, if the trial

court did not conduct a contradictory hearing regarding an exception of lack of

personal jurisdiction, then “the court will decide the matter on a record comprised

of ‘pleadings, memoranda, and discovery depositions taken’ in the matter.’” 2012-

655, pp. 6-7, 119 So.3d at 775-76.

LIMITED REHEARING GRANTED

2