"If you have a JD and passed the bar you are entitled to Esq. after your name. See my post with her credentials."
First of all we need to establish whether or not it was Grier's idea to append Esq. The ‘Esq.’ behind her name appears nowhere else except the MIHL ‘press release.
THERE IS NOTHING TO SHOW THAT GRIER HAS BEEN BEFORE THE BAR.
If she has, why is it not stated in her CV?
The American Bar Association has something to say about the designation 'Esq.' and the EXCERPTS and LINK appear below.
EXCERPTS: A few years ago, an ethics committee of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York considered the ancient origins of esquire in an effort to interpret its modern usage by lawyers.
Actually, however, the law is not settled on whether a person using esquire (or Esq.) and other such seemingly benign designations as lawyer, attorney at law and juris doctor is entitled to practice law. Lawyers who use those terms indiscriminately may find themselves sliding down a slippery ethics slope.
THE USUAL SUSPECTS
Today, most of those opinions permit lawyers to use professional designations that are not “false or misleading.” Unfortunately, however, the issue is not as simple as it sounds. The “usual suspects” in most of the opinions that tackle this issue are law school graduates who have not passed the bar, lawyers who are on inactive status or licensed only in another state, and lawyers engaged in a business or profession other than the practice of law. Law school graduates who have not passed the bar are treated essentially as nonlawyers by UPL rules. Accordingly, unlicensed law school graduates may not practice law or hold themselves out as lawyers, and they are prohibited from identifying themselves by such terms as lawyer and attorney at law.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
