The Louisiana Supreme Court issued an opinion October 24, 2025, in *Darouse v. P.J.'s Coffee of New Orleans, LLC and New Orleans Roast, LLC*, affirming lower court decisions that clarified when service fees must be paid in civil litigation. The case addresses a procedural question that has divided Louisiana appellate courts regarding the interpretation of Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1201(C).

Justice Hughes wrote the opinion for the court in case No. 2025-CC-00078, which came to the high court on a writ of certiorari from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal in Orleans Parish. The dispute centered on the meaning of the word "requested" in Article 1201(C), which requires that "service of the citation shall be requested on all named defendants within ninety days."

The procedural dispute arose when defendants P.J.'s Coffee of New Orleans, LLC and New Orleans Roast, LLC filed an exception of insufficiency of service of process and a motion for involuntary dismissal. The defendants argued that plaintiff Lanell E. Darouse failed to properly request service because he did not timely remit all service fees to the sheriff's office within the statutory 90-day period.

Defendants contended that both a request for service and full payment of all fees must be submitted within the ninety-day period to satisfy Article 1201(C). This interpretation would require plaintiffs to pay all service-related costs upfront as part of the service request itself.

Darouse argued that submitting a request for service to the clerk of court alone satisfies Article 1201, regardless of when fees are paid. This position maintains that the statutory language focuses on the timing of the request itself, not the completion of payment obligations.

Both the district court and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal sided with the plaintiff's interpretation. The appellate court held in *DaRouse v. P.J.'s Coffee of New Orleans, LLC*, 24-0689 (La. App. 4 Cir. 12/17/24), 414 So.3d 602, that Article 1201(C) does not require payment of all service-related fees during the ninety-day period allotted for the timely request for service.

The Louisiana Supreme Court noted that appellate court rulings on this precise issue have been conflicting across the state's circuit courts. The court emphasized that this marked the first instance in which the high court had the opportunity to address this specific procedural question after full briefing and oral argument, having previously ruled on various factual scenarios in similar matters through summary dispositions.

The court's affirmation of the lower courts' decisions establishes that Louisiana Civil Code of Procedure Article 1201(C) requires only that service be requested within the 90-day deadline, not that all associated fees be paid during that period. This interpretation provides clarity for practitioners and plaintiffs regarding the timing requirements for initiating service of process.

The ruling has practical implications for civil litigation in Louisiana. Plaintiffs who submit timely requests for service will not face dismissal of their cases solely because they failed to pay all service fees within the initial 90-day window. This interpretation reduces the risk of involuntary dismissals based on technical payment timing issues while maintaining the core requirement that service requests be initiated promptly.

The decision also provides guidance to defense counsel regarding the viability of challenging service based on fee payment timing. The ruling suggests that such challenges will not succeed when the underlying service request was timely filed, regardless of when fees were remitted to court officials.

For court clerks and sheriff's offices handling service of process, the decision clarifies that they should process timely service requests even when full payment has not yet been received, provided other procedural requirements are met.

The case demonstrates the ongoing evolution of procedural law interpretation as courts balance the need for clear deadlines with practical considerations in civil litigation. The Louisiana Supreme Court's resolution of this split among appellate courts provides statewide uniformity on an important procedural question.

The opinion in *Darouse v. P.J.'s Coffee* establishes precedent that will guide lower courts in similar procedural disputes. Legal practitioners can now rely on clear guidance regarding the timing requirements for service requests versus fee payments under Article 1201(C).

This procedural clarification may influence how attorneys advise clients regarding service timelines and fee payment obligations. The ruling reduces uncertainty that previously existed due to conflicting appellate decisions across Louisiana's judicial circuits.