In Re: Jonathan Gardere Carter

Supreme Court of Louisiana
June 25, 2025
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
IN RE: JONATHAN GARDERE CARTER
No. 2025-B-00715
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Office of Disciplinary Counsel - Applicant Other; Jonathan Gardere Carter
- Applicant Other; Joint Petition for Consent Discipline;
_ _ _ _ _ _
June 25, 2025
Joint petition for consent discipline accepted. See per curiam.
Crain, J., dissents and would reject the petition for consent discipline.
McCallum, J., dissents and would reject the petition for consent discipline.
JDH
JLW
PDG
JMG
CRC
06/25/2025 "See News Release 029 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2025-B-0715
IN RE: JONATHAN GARDERE CARTER
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING
PER CURIAM
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commence d an investigation
into allegations that respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with
clients, failed to expediate litigations, failed to promptly return unearned fees, and
failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. Following the filing of formal
charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline.
Having reviewed the petition,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that
Jonathan Gardere Carter, Louisiana Bar Roll number 36407, be suspended from the
practice of law for one year and one day with all but six months deferred, retroactive
to the date of respondent’s interim suspension in In re: Carter, 25-0076 (La 1/29/25),
400 So. 3d 93.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon completion of the active portion of
his suspension, respondent shall be placed on probation with the probationary period
to run concurrently with the agreement between respondent and the Judges and
Lawyer’s Assistance Program (“JLAP”). If respondent fails to enter into a JLAP
agreement within thirty days of the date of this order, the ODC shall immediately
advise this court and may move to set aside this consent discipline.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a ny failure of respondent 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.

2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all costs and expenses in the matter are
assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1,
with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of t his court’s
judgment until paid.