TOMMY KEATING AND LISA KEATING v. LEE MILLER AND FAMILY SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY (2024)

We grant Tommy and Lisa Keating's (“the Keatings”) application for rehearing for the limited purpose of addressing their argument that the majority opinion conflicts with La. C.C. art. 3472.1, Robinson v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2022-0726 (La. App. 4 Cir. 6/20/23), 368 So.3d 1143, and Peralez v. HDI Glob. Specialty SE, 2022-343 (La. App. 3 Cir. 11/9/22), 353 So.3d 235.

Following this Court's December 8, 2023 decision, the Keatings’ filed an application for rehearing, seeking reconsideration of our decision. On rehearing, the Keatings re-urged their original argument that their suit was timely filed. The Keatings further argued that the majority opinion fails to examine whether the Keatings’ claim was filed within sixty days of the termination of the suspension.

However, the Keatings fail to consider that their petition for damages was filed on November 9, 2021 when the claim prescribed on October 14, 2021. Further, the emergency suspension period that commenced on August 26, 2021 applied to claims that were prescribing within the thirty-day period. In light of the emergency suspension period not applying to the Keatings’ claim nor attaching additional time to the Keatings’ running prescription, their claim is time-barred.

For these reasons, we grant a rehearing, deny relief, and affirm our original opinion.

APPLICATION FOR REHEARING GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED; ORIGINAL OPINION AFFIRMED

I agree that the rehearing should be granted, but I would also grant the relief requested for the reasons set forth in my dissent.

JUDGE SANDRA CABRINA JENKINS

BELSOME, J., CONCURS IN PART AND DISSENTS IN PART