In Re: Kelly Rae Englert

Supreme Court of Louisiana
April 01, 2025
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
IN RE: KELLY RAE ENGLERT
No. 2025-B-00170
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Office of Disciplinary Counsel - Applicant Other; Rule to Revoke Probation;
_ _ _ _ _ _
April 01, 2025
Probation revoked. See per curiam.
Hughes, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
JLW
WJC
JBM
PDG
JMG
CRC
04/01/2025 "See News Release 015 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2025-B-0170
IN RE: KELLY RAE ENGLERT
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING
PER CURIAM
The instant disciplinary proceeding arises from an unopposed motion to
revoke probation and make deferred suspension executory filed by the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) against respondent, Kelly Rae Englert, for her
alleged failure to comply with the conditions of probation imposed in In re: Englert,
21-1819 (La. 2/8/22), 332 So. 3d 634 (“Englert I”).
UNDERLYING FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In Englert I, respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated. For this
misconduct, we accepted a petition for consent discipline and suspended respondent
from the practice of law for one year and one day, deferred in its entirety, subject to
a period of probation to coincide with the terms of a Judges and Lawyers Assistance
Program (“JLAP”) monitoring agreement executed on June 1, 2021 as well as the
conditions set forth in the petition for consent discipline. Our order also provided
that any failure of respon dent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any
misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred
suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.
In March 2022, respondent executed a probation agreement. As part of the
probation agreement, respondent was required to, in pertinent part: (1) comply with
the terms of her June 1, 2021 JLAP agreement; (2) fulfill the terms of any subsequent
agreements w ith JLAP; (3) acknowledge and agree that JLAP is authorized to

2

provide quarterly reports to the ODC documenting her compliance; and (4)
acknowledge that any violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct and/or the
probation agreement may result in summary revocation of probation and making the
deferred suspension exe cutory and/or may result in the imposition of additional
discipline.
On December 28, 2024, the ODC filed the instant “Unopposed Motion to
Revoke Probation Pursuant to Rule XIX, Appendix C, Rule 6C, and Impose
Previously Deferred Suspension” with the disciplinary board, submitting there is
sufficient evidence demonstrating that respondent has violated the court’s order and
her probation agreement.1 Specifically, the motion asserts that respondent submitted
her quarterly compliance report which revealed she tested positive for alcohol in
October 2024, in violation of her JLAP agreement. 2 Thereafter, the ODC received
a letter from JLAP advising that respondent contacted JLAP and informed them she
no longer wanted to participate in JLAP monitoring and her file with JLAP was
closed. The ODC contends that “[w]ithout the ability to monitor r espondent’s
recovery and sobriety in a meaningful way through a JLAP contract, the ODC is not
in a position to represent to the Court that Respondent has complied with the
conditions of probation.” Accordingly, the motion provides that respondent should
not be allowed to continue to practice law and her probation should be revoked.

1 The ODC included in its motion an email from Respondent confirming she had no opposition to
the motion.
2 The ODC represents that respondent does not dispute the result of her positive alcohol test,
admitting that she drank alcohol on a work -related trip. Respondent is not currently practicing
law; rather, the parties represent she is an insurance adjuster. Respondent advised the ODC that
she has a small child and considering the expense and time associated with complying with the
JLAP agreement relapse provisions, when she is not seeking to practice law, does not currently
serve her best interests. She understands that when and if she should seek reinstatement to the
practice of law, she will likely have to comply with JLAP and the reinstatement provisions related
thereto.

3

Hearing on Revocation of Probation
The ODC and respondent filed a joint notice of consent to waive a hearing on
the matter. As such, the matter was submitted to the board without a hearing.

Disciplinary Board Recommendation
After considering the “uncontested allegations” and exhibits submitted, the
record, and the applicable law, the disciplinary board found that the ODC presented
sufficient evidence to demonstrate that respondent failed to comply with the terms
and conditions of her probation. On February 3, 2025, the board filed its report with
this court, recommending that the ODC’s unopposed motion be granted.
Accordingly, the board recommended that respondent’s probation be revoked and
that the deferred one year and on e day suspension be made executory. The board
also recommended that she be assessed with all costs and expenses of these
proceedings.

DISCUSSION
A review of the record reveals that respondent has not complied with the
requirements of her probation agreement. She has admitted to and tested positive
for consuming alcohol in violation of her JLAP agreement. Respondent has
expressed that she is not s eeking to practice law and no longer wishes to be
monitored by JLAP with full understanding that same is a condition of her probation.
Under the circumstances, we feel it is necessary to revoke respondent’s probation
and impose the previously-deferred suspension.
Accordingly, we will accept the disciplinary board’s recommendation and
grant the motion to revoke respondent’s probation, making the deferred suspension
imposed in Englert I immediately executory.

4

DECREE
For the reasons assigned, respondent’s probation is revoked and the deferred
suspension of one year and one day imposed in In re: Englert, 21-1819 (La. 2/8/22),
332 So. 3d 634, is hereby made immediately executory. All costs and expenses in
the matter are assessed against respondent, Kelly Rae Englert, Louisiana Bar Roll
number 34536, in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal
interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court ’s judgment
until paid.