At the hearing on the exceptions, J R put on evidence establishing that it relocated its registered office to Orleans Parish and that the clerk of court's office in Orleans Parish was open on December 26, 2007. A similar argument was rejected by the federal district court in Toups v. Texaco, Inc., 317 F.Supp. 579 (W.D.La. 1970). The Palms Casino, as an alleged joint tortfeasor of J R, joins in this argument.
However, this statute does not apply to federal district court. Be that as it may, the Federal Court in Monroe was closed on the Friday after Thanksgiving - November 23, 2012. 317 F. Supp. 579 (W.D. La. 1970) citing Saxon v. Fireman's Ins. Co. of Newark, New Jersey, et al, 224 So.2d 560 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1969). See also Louisiana Civil Code article 5059 as to computation of time which expressly does not include a legal holiday in computing a period of time allowed or prescribed by law.
However, the Plaintiff has choice of forum in filing his claim which includes filing in a forum that may be closed due to a legal holiday despite the fact that other forum courts are open for filing. In Toups v. Texaco Inc., 317 F.Supp. 579, 580 (W.D. La. 1970), the court rejected the Defendant's argument that because the Plaintiff's choice of forum was closed for a legal holiday, the Plaintiff should have filed in a concurrent jurisdiction where the forum was open in order to make the filing timely. It held that a plaintiff is not required to seek an alternative forum in other parishes where jurisdiction may be found to avoid prescription because a Clerk's office in the plaintiff's choice of forum is closed for a legal holiday or some other reason.
In Roberts v. General Dynamics, Convair Corp., 425 F. Supp. 688 (S.D.Tex. 1977) the issue was raised but the case was decided on other grounds. In Toups v. Texaco, Inc., 317 F. Supp. 579 (W.D.La. 1970) the court chose to look to state law. Citing a Louisiana case which held that a limitations statute is tolled from a legal holiday or weekend until the next legal day, the court opted to apply Rule 6(a) principles and held that the limitations statute was not a bar.