In 2009 Susan Friery, M.D./J.D. appeared in a Boston Magazine Article as one of the beautiful Massachusetts lawyers of 2009. Her picture in a yoga stance with her dog was a prominent feature of the article. She was in fact beautiful, but not in fact a Medical Doctor. The dog so far as we are aware is apparently a real dog, although has been difficult to confirm. She served as an associate and partner in the law firm of Kreindler & Kreindler, although she has since left the firm. She is described in the article as having participated in mass disaster litigation including the Pan Am Lockerbie litigation and medical malpractice cases. The article can be accessed at the following.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/gallery/101508_lawyers?pg=2
Beginning in 1998, the firm promoted the respondent’s credentials, including her alleged medical degree, her specialization and training in forensic pathology and her medical experience, in its web-based marketing. When the firm elected the respondent as partner in 2009, it lauded her alleged medical credentials in a press release, including that she had graduated from the Columbia’s medical school, in the top one-percent of her class, was a licensed medical doctor and had worked as such in numerous hospitals.
The Court did note that there was no apparent harm done because of Ms. Friery’s deception.
There is no indication that the respondent’s misrepresentations had any adverse effect on the quality of the respondent’s work on behalf of the firm and its clients, or that such misrepresentations caused any harm to the firm or its clients. Many of the misrepresentations made or repeated by colleagues or staff as to respondent’s credentials were made without the respondent’s direct participation, although she was generally aware that they were being made. In addition, many of the misrepresentations were made in a context in which they were not material to any specific pending decision or action by a client, adversary or tribunal.
While the court had to to impose some level of sanction for the deceit by a member of the bar its imposed penalty was generally light. There is no word from the dog as to whether it he or she will continue with the relationship, but they are not known to rely on titles for their affection.
It takes 5 minutes to google the State Medical Board and to search for her name.
In all of the years, didn't anyone think to do that?
The dog, however, does appear to be a dog. I agree.
Richard Willner
Posted by: Richard Willner | 12/19/2012 at 05:41 PM