Skip to main content

Jane T. Haviland

Associate

[email protected]

+1.617.348.4473

Share:

Jane’s practice focuses primarily on health care enforcement defense. Jane defends laboratories, physicians, and other clients facing government investigations and whistleblower complaints regarding alleged violations of the federal False Claims Act, the federal anti-kickback statute, the Stark law, and similar state laws. Recent victories to which Jane has contributed include:

  • Successfully defended a national laboratory against a whistleblower’s qui tam complaint.
  • Defense verdicts on summary judgment in multi-jurisdictional product liability disputes involving FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs and assay test development.
  • Defense verdict on partial summary judgment in a bet-the-company case involving a dispute between the majority owner of a multi-billion dollar company and private equity investors.

Jane also maintains an active pro bono practice, succeeding on an appeal before an administrative law judge and securing social security benefits for her client. Jane has also appeared in family and probate court on behalf of her clients in guardianship and custody matters. Most recently, Jane’s pro bono practice has focused on social justice efforts, including participating in CORI sealing clinics and conducting research specific to assisting individuals with criminal records in understanding their public housing options.

While attending law school at night and working full time for the State Auditor’s Office, Jane was the winner of the National Moot Court New England Regional Competition and the two-time winner of the Tom C. Clark Appellate Advocacy Competition. She also served as Comment Editor of the Suffolk University Law Review. She graduated first in her class from Suffolk Law’s evening program.

Education

  • Suffolk University Law School (JD, Summa Cum Laude, Dean's List)
  • Boston University (BA, English, Cum Laude, Dean’s List)

Viewpoints

Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

Panel Discussion Among Government Lawyers Provides Key Insights into the Future of FCA Enforcement

June 1, 2021 | Blog | By Jane Haviland, Samantha Kingsbury, Karen Lovitch

During a recent panel discussion hosted virtually by the American Bar Association, attorneys from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and certain U.S. Attorneys’ Offices known for health care fraud enforcement provided valuable insight into key areas of health care fraud enforcement, including opioid-related enforcement, kickbacks to providers involving speaker programs, and allegations involving electronic medical records (EMR) vendors.  The panel also addressed the role of private equity funds as owners and operators of companies under investigation and provided observations and recommendations about effective compliance programs and their role in resolving health care fraud matters.
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), industry, policymakers, and consumers share a common goal of ensuring that the foods and beverages Americans eat and drink are safe, and the law has long prohibited the adulteration of a food that “contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health.” As science and technology advance, so too does our collective understanding of what that famous statutory phrase from the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act should mean. Accordingly, FDA’s mission in overseeing the safety of the food supply is constantly subject to change. One excellent example of that is playing out in real time, because due to enhanced methods of detecting toxic elements in food, consumer interest groups and Congress have raised questions about FDA’s apparent lack of interest in looking for potential contaminants in our foods (even as available data show that the levels of some metals, like lead, have been in a general decline in the food supply as manufacturing also becomes more sophisticated and controlled and industry invests in better detection methods in the advancement of the shared goal of food safety).
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail
In an unexpected twist to a troubling situation that began over two years ago, U.S. Special Counsel Henry Kerner penned a letter to President Biden on March 31, 2021 questioning the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) handling of a whistleblower case that alleged improprieties surrounding compliance inspections of vaccine manufacturing facilities. Special Counsel Kerner’s letter to the President coincided with his closing of the investigation and his conclusion that the agency’s actions met “all the statutory requirements” but that they nonetheless “do not appear reasonable.” What the new leadership at the FDA’s parent Department of Health and Human Services or within Congress may do with these findings remains to be seen and certainly bears watching in the coming weeks and months. The March 31 letter was also provided to the Democratic Chairs and the ranking Republicans on the Senate Health Committee and the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which oversee FDA operations, increasing the likelihood of additional investigation and potentially public hearings, especially with congressional reauthorization of the various user fee programs looming as a must-pass action for 2022.
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

Health Care Enforcement Update:  Covid-19 Fraud Cases Brought By DOJ And Private Plaintiffs

March 31, 2021 | Blog | By Grady Campion, Jane Haviland, Karen Lovitch

On Friday, March 26, 2021, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced an update on its efforts to combat COVID-19 related fraud.  Since Congress first responded to the coronavirus pandemic by passing $2.2 trillion in relief through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020, DOJ has pursued civil and criminal actions primarily targeting (1) fraudulent COVID-19 related tests or treatments, and (2) abuse of the CARES Act’s popular Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).  Friday’s announcement revealed that DOJ is also ramping up its efforts to prosecute fraud on the CARES Act’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) and Unemployment Insurance (UI) initiatives. 
Read more
Webinar Reference Image

Health Care Enforcement Year in Review & 2021 Outlook

February 18, 2021 | | By Eoin Beirne, Brian Dunphy, Karen Lovitch, Kevin McGinty, Samantha Kingsbury, Keshav Ahuja, Grady Campion, Jane Haviland, Caitie Hill

Despite the threat of COVID-19 paralyzing much of the country in 2020, government health care fraud enforcement continued even though the Department of Justice (DOJ) had the added burden of pursuing COVID-19 related fraud. Mintz’s Health Care Enforcement Defense team has reviewed the key policy issues, statistics, settlements, and court decisions from 2020, and in this report we reflect on those developments and also predict the trends in health care enforcement in 2021 and beyond.
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

HHS Finalizes Highly Anticipated Final Rules Amending Anti-Kickback Statute and Stark Law Regulations, Part II: Beneficiary Inducement

December 1, 2020 | Blog | By Karen Lovitch, Ellyn Sternfield, Rachel Yount, Jane Haviland

While health care entities often want to provide free or discounted items or services to patients (e.g., free transportation, co-payment waivers, free supplies), these free or discounted items or services pose risk under both the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) and the civil monetary penalty rules regarding beneficiary inducements (Beneficiary Inducements CMP), so minimizing risk when providing such items or services is important.  Fortunately, as announced last week, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a final rule making sweeping changes to the regulations implementing the AKS and the Beneficiary Inducements CMP, many of which will result in greater flexibility and reduced administrative burdens for the health care industry. 
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail
As predicted, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other enforcement agencies have acted quickly to bring substantial criminal enforcement actions for fraud against the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). Acting Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Brian Rabbitt announced recently that the DOJ’s Criminal Division reached the important milestone that day of criminally charging more than 50 individuals for alleged fraud committed to obtain PPP funds.
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

OIG Approves Discount Medical Plan Referral Arrangement

July 6, 2020 | Blog | By Theresa Carnegie, Jane Haviland

On June 26, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued Advisory Opinion No. 20-03 approving the payment by a discount medical plan organization (DMPO) of a five dollar ($5.00) fee to chiropractors for the referral of new members to the DMPO.  OIG determined that even though the arrangement could result in prohibited remuneration, it would not impose administrative sanctions or civil monetary penalties for violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). 
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

COVID-19 Relief Programs: The Anticipated Wave of False Claims Act Cases and Oversight Agency Enforcement Activities

July 2, 2020 | Blog | By Brian Dunphy, Geoffrey Friedman, Caitie Hill, Jane Haviland, Karen Lovitch

Leading up to a webinar on July 15, 2020, we are publishing a blog series covering the risks of enforcement against companies that received COVID-19 relief funds under the CARES Act and strategies for mitigating these risks.  This second installment of our series discusses our predictions related to litigation and enforcement activities. We expect a substantial number of False Claims Act (“FCA”) investigations and lawsuits initiated mainly by whistleblowers (also known as “relators”). The FCA remains the government’s primary enforcement tool for pursuing alleged fraud by recipients of government funds, and FCA claims present substantial risk because the statute permits treble damages and significant per-claim penalties. For example, an erroneous $100,000 loan under the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) can result in $300,000 in FCA damages, or more.
Read more
Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail

COVID-19 Relief Programs: Mitigating and Responding To Enforcement Risk

June 22, 2020 | Blog | By Brian Dunphy, Jane Haviland, Nicole Henry, Karen Lovitch

Since the early days of the pandemic, Mintz’s COVID-19 Compliance & Enforcement Defense Task Force has closely monitored and advised clients on the evolving COVID-19 relief programs, including those created by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). The CARES Act provided for over $2 trillion in relief funds, which is the largest emergency assistance package in American history. The numerous CARES Act programs have continued to develop through, among other things, the passage of the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act, the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020, and rapidly changing regulatory guidance and FAQs. As one example, the government recently wrestled with whether to make public the list of about 4.6 million entities that received more than $500 billion from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) under the CARES Act. After initially refusing to disclose PPP loan recipients, the Small Business Administration and Treasury Department decided to make public the names of entities that received loans larger than $150,000, as well as the dollar range of each loan.
Read more