Anthony R Friedman Missouri Bar Number 65531 Is A Sworn Officer Of The Court

Anthony R. Friedman, attorney Mo. Bar #65531 is a Sworn Officer Of The Court

Anthony R. Friedman d/b/a Friedman Law Firm LLC is a Sworn Officer Of The Court and is subject to scrutiny and public expose unmitigated

Albert Pepper's profile picture
Albert Pepper,Neighbor

Posted Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 12:58 pm CT|

(warning to the public and consumers with regard to anthony r. friedman d/b/a friedman law firm llc as a “sworn officer of the court”)

Anthony R. Friedman (Missouri Bar #65531), as a licensed attorney offering professional services for financial consideration, operates in a public trust capacity that subjects his professional conduct, business practices, and public record to direct civic scrutiny and consumer advocacy exposure, conceptually similar to the public accountability applied to elected officials. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]The Legal and Ethical Basis of Attorney Public Accountability

  • Officer of the Court Status: Under the Missouri Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Rule 4), attorneys swear an oath to uphold the law and administer justice honestly. Because their authority is state-granted and directly impacts the life, liberty, and property of citizens, their professional integrity is a matter of legitimate public concern.
  • Commercial Solicitation: Operating a commercial enterprise—such as The Friedman Law Firm LLC—means advertising and client representation are subject to state consumer protection frameworks, such as the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, rather than shielded private transactions. [1, 2]
  • Public Records and Citizen Advocacy: Public dockets, regulatory filings, and disciplinary inquiries are open archives. Public commentary, consumer watchdog documentation, and citizen reporting regarding these public actions operate as protected speech under established oversight principles. [1]

Documented Public Scrutiny and Dockets

  • Active OCDC Investigation: The Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Missouri opened and accepted jurisdiction over an investigative file (Case #25-2531-X) regarding professional conduct complaints. [1]
  • The May 13, 2026 Dismissal: In Case #2611-PN00554 within the 11th Judicial Circuit Court of St. Charles County, Judge William Byrnes dismissed with prejudice an ex parte order of protection petition filed by Friedman against consumer advocate Albert B. Pepper Jr. [1]
  • Public Compliance and Advocacy Tracking: Publicly accessible logs and consumer documentation—such as Not the Friedman Law Firm Saint Charles—track local municipal compliance, professional history, and advertising profiles. [1, 2]

The professional and business conduct of a Sworn Officer Of The Court is a matter of public interest and consumer safety the same as an elected politician or official.

Acts of “Abuse of Process”, “Fraud Upon The Court”. “Perjury Under Oath”, “Libel per se”, Violations of the Missouri Model Rules of Professional Conduct”, “Lack of Candor With The Tribunal”, “Failed Ex Parte Applications”, “Failures in Representation of a Clients Interests”, etc. are all subject to investigation and expose that serve the public and consumer interest.

Bulleted Summary of Arguments:

Attorneys Subject to Public Accountability: As a licensed attorney and “Sworn Officer of the Court” operating for financial gain, Anthony R. Friedman (Missouri Bar #65531 / Friedman Law Firm LLC) operates in a position of public trust. Therefore, his professional conduct, legal filings, and business practices are legitimate matters of public interest and subject to public scrutiny, civic oversight, and consumer reporting—similar to elected officials.

Commercial Enterprise & Consumer Protection: Running a law practice is a commercial enterprise subject to consumer protection standards (such as the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act) rather than private, unscrutinized transactions.

Citation of Public Records & Proceedings: The article highlights documented public records as evidence supporting public scrutiny, including:

  • An active Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel (OCDC) investigation file (Case #25-2531-X).
  • The dismissal with prejudice of an ex parte order of protection petition filed by Friedman against consumer advocate Albert B. Pepper Jr. in St. Charles County Circuit Court (Case #2611-PN00554).

Consumer Warning Regarding Marketing/Reviews: The accompanying graphic explicitly warns consumers to conduct thorough due diligence before hiring Friedman, alleging that several five-star Google reviews for his practice are fraudulent or represent business-to-business engagement rather than authentic consumer experiences.