Universal Services and Associates, LLC v. Wade Grundmeyer, Val Coerver, Tauber Oil Company, Tauber Petrochemical Co., Chad Verhoff and Carolyn Sheffield

Opinion

UNIVERSAL SERVICES AND * NO. 2022-CA-0427 ASSOCIATES, LLC

*

VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL

*

WADE GRUNDMEYER, VAL FOURTH CIRCUIT COERVER, TAUBER OIL * COMPANY, TAUBER STATE OF LOUISIANA PETROCHEMICAL CO., ******* CHAD VERHOFF AND CAROLYN SHEFFIELD

APPEAL FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2021-08933, DIVISION “E” Honorable Omar Mason, Judge ****** JUDGE SANDRA CABRINA JENKINS ****** (Court composed of Judge Roland L. Belsome, Judge Sandra Cabrina Jenkins, Judge Rachael D. Johnson)

BELSOME, J., CONCURS IN THE RESULT

James C. Cronvich Clarence F. Favret, III Jordan T. LeBlanc FAVRET CARRIERE CRONVICH, LLC 650 Poydras Street Suite 2300 New Orleans, LA 70130

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

Tristan Edwards Manthey Loretta G. Mince Michael R. Dodson FISHMAN HAYGOOD, L.L.P. 201 St. Charles Avenue Suite 4600 New Orleans, LA 70170-4600

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE

LIMITED REHEARING GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED; ORIGINAL OPINION AFFIRMED MARCH 20, 2023

SCJ RDJ

We grant plaintiff-appellant, Universal Services and Associates, L.L.C.

(“Universal”) application for rehearing for the limited purpose of addressing its

argument that this Court erred in not performing an equitable estoppel analysis.

In our January 26, 2023 opinion, we found that, although the defendant-

appellees were not signatories of the Universal and Tauber contracts, they could

avail themselves of the clause because Universal failed to show that the forum

selection clause was “unreasonable or unjust, or that the clause is invalid for such

reasons as fraud or overreaching.” Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Rimkus Consulting Grp.,

Inc. of Louisiana, 2013-1977, p. 9 (La. 7/1/14), 148 So.3d 871, 877.

First, we note that in its original appellant’s brief, Universal argued that

equitable estoppel is inapplicable because it is not attempting to enforce a right

under the contracts. However, in its application for rehearing, Universal contends

that an equitable estoppel analysis is needed to determine whether the forum

selection clause applied to the defendant-appellees, Wade Grundmeyer, Val

Coerver, WMG Enterprises, L.L.C. (“WMG”), and Coerver Enterprises, Inc.

2

(“Coerver Enterprises”), who were non-signatories to the contract with Tauber Oil

Company. We disagree.

“It is well settled that appellate courts will not consider issues raised for the

first time, which are not pleaded in the court below and which the district court has

not addressed.” Hardy v. Juvenile Justice Intervention Center, 2021-0715, p. 5 (La.

App. 4 Cir. 6/15/22), 342 So.3d 1076, 1080 (citing Council of City of New Orleans

v. Washington, 2009-1067, pp. 3-4 (La. 5/29/09), 9 So.3d 854, 856). Furthermore,

our courts “generally do not grant rehearings to consider issues raised for the first

time in the application for rehearing.” Lege v. Union Carbide Corp., 2020-0252

(La. App. 4 Cir. 5/12/21), ---So.3d ----, 2021 WL 1917784, * 2 (quoting Rodrigue

v. LeGros, 563 So.2d 248, 257 (La. 1990) (internal citation omitted).

Accordingly, we decline to consider for the first time on appeal, Universal’s

argument that an equitable estoppel analysis is needed to determine the

applicability of the forum selection clause.

For these reasons, we grant a limited rehearing, deny relief, and affirm our

original opinion.

LIMITED REHEARING GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED; ORIGINAL OPINION AFFIRMED