Megan McFadden


  • JD, University of Virginia School of Law, 2013; Editor-In- Chief, Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law
  • BA, summa cum laude, Washington University in St. Louis, 2008


  • Massachusetts, 2013

Megan McFadden


Megan McFadden joined the litigation department as an associate in 2014. Prior to joining the firm, Megan worked as a Special Assistant District Attorney at the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office, where she handled arraignments, argued motions, and tried criminal cases as a part of the Malden District Court team.

During law school, Megan served as the Editor-in-Chief of the Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law. She also participated in a yearlong prosecution clinic.


Securities Enforcement

  • Represents private equity clients and other registered investment advisers in SEC examinations and enforcement actions, including responses to deficiency letters and investigative subpoenas.
  • Conducted internal investigation on behalf of the Special Committee of the Board of Directors of a publicly traded technology company into the events leading up to the company’s unexpected bankruptcy filing. Represented the company and individual officers in SEC inquiry into those same events as they related to market disclosures in the months leading up to the unexpected bankruptcy filing.


  • Conducted anti-corruption diligence and risk assessments for numerous private equity clients investing domestically and abroad.
  • Represented large multinational pharmaceutical company in a variety of anti-corruption and compliance investigations in Asia and the Middle East. Developed compliance strategies and remediation plans to control for FCPA and other compliance risks.

Civil Litigation

  • Represented a large hospital client in a cluster of employment, tort, and intellectual property disputes related to certain scientific research conducted by hospital fellows.
  • As part of a joint defense group, represented an individual officer of a public company in the settlement of a securities litigation class action.

Pro Bono

  • Commonwealth vs George Perrot: Part of litigation team that successfully represented Mr. Perrot in a motion for new trial based on recently-developed evidence that hair comparison testimony in his 1992 trial exceeded the limits of science. The Commonwealth ultimately dropped all charges against Mr. Perrot. This decision could pave the way for other favorable decisions involving erroneous hair analyst testimony in Massachusetts and around the country.
  • Represented numerous individuals in asylum and other immigration-related proceedings. 
Cookie Settings