Kyle Choate

Attorney in Lafayette, LA

Kyle N. Choate obtained a B.S. degree in Marketing and Legal Studies from The University of Louisiana at Lafayette in 2006, and a Juris Doctor Degree from Loyola University College of Law in 2010. While in law school, Mr. Choate was a member of the Law and Technology Annual, National Scholars Honor Society, Young Leadership Counsel, and worked with the New Orleans Public Defenders Office and the New Orleans Advocacy Center. During his time in law school, Mr. Choate also clerked for the Honorable John J. Molaison, 24th Judicial District Court, in Gretna, Louisiana.

Mr. Choate is admitted to practice in all federal and state courts in the State of Louisiana, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He is a member of the Louisiana State Bar Association, Lafayette Bar Association, Lafayette Young Lawyers Association, and the American Bar Association. Mr. Choate is also actively involved in the community, volunteering and serving on the board of various local organizations.

Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating N/A help_info

Areas of Law

  • Admiralty and Maritime Law
  • Insurance Defense
  • Premises Liability
  • Litigation
  • Personal Injury


Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 2010, Louisiana
U.S. District Court, Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Louisiana

Law School Attended

Loyola University College of Law
Class of 2010

University Attended

University of Louisiana at Lafayette
Class of 2006

Birth Information

Born in 1983
Lafayette, Louisiana

Contact Information


(337) 269-0061


Send email to Kyle Choate

Office Information
Kyle Choate
The Harding Center 1018 Harding Street, Suite 202,
Lafayette, LA 70503


Juneau David, APLC (Lafayette, Louisiana)

About Client Rating
About Peer Rating

Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

Determining a Rating

The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

  • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
  • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
  • 1-2.9 Rated

Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

The Reviewers

Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.


Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

Martindale-Hubbell's role

Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.