Skip to main content

Rebecca L. Zeidel

Associate

[email protected]

+1.617.348.4496

Share:

Rebecca’s practice involves a range of litigation matters, including securities litigation, insurance disputes, complex civil litigation, government investigations, and white collar criminal defense.

In 2016, Rebecca served as a Special Assistant District Attorney in Middlesex County. In that role, she prosecuted numerous drug, larceny, breaking and entering, and motor vehicle cases; argued motions to suppress and motions to dismiss; and tried eleven cases to verdict, including six jury trials.

Rebecca serves as director of Mintz's Domestic Violence Project, the firm's signature pro bono initiative. Among her pro bono work at the firm, Rebecca has assisted in preparing amicus briefs submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, including in a recent First Amendment speech case, McCullen v. Coakley. She has also represented victims of domestic violence in G. L. c. 209A restraining order proceedings under the firm’s Domestic Violence Project, including assisting the family of a victim in a high profile domestic abuse case.

Before joining the firm, Rebecca practiced as an associate in the Boston office of an international law firm.

During law school, Rebecca was a Note Editor for the Boston College Law Review and a member of the Religious Freedom Moot Court Team. She was also a student attorney in the Boston College Legal Assistance Bureau’s Civil Litigation Clinic, where she represented clients in housing, family law, and public benefits disputes.

Education

  • Boston College (JD)
  • Harvard College (BA, History, magna cum laude)

Recognition & Awards

  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch":  Litigation - Securities (2022) 
  • Included on the Massachusetts Super Lawyers List: Securities Litigation (2018-2020)

Languages

- French

- Hebrew

Viewpoints

Health Care Viewpoints Thumbnail
Physician judgment and medical necessity increasingly are a focus of fraud and abuse enforcement actions, with statistical analysis of procedure volumes used to flag potential cases. Last week, the Atlantic published this recent article discussing a significant 2018 decision of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States ex rel. Polukoff v. St. Mark’s Hospital, et al., No. 17-4014 (10th Cir. Jul. 9, 2018), in which the court held that a physician’s medical judgment concerning medical necessity of a particular treatment for two specific cardiac conditions could be “false or fraudulent” under the federal False Claims Act (FCA). Our colleague, Brian Dunphy, covered the 2018 decision on this blog here. The Tenth Circuit ultimately held that a “doctor’s certification to the government that a procedure is ‘reasonable and necessary’ is ‘false’ under the FCA if the procedure was not reasonable and necessary under the government’s definition of the phrase.”
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, Rebecca Zeidel

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
Securities & Capital Markets Viewpoints Thumbnail
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kokesh v. SEC imposes a five-year statute of limitations on agency-sought disgorgement in SEC enforcement actions, resolving a Circuit split and definitively categorizing disgorgement as a statutory “penalty” under 28 U.S.C. § 2462.
Read more

News & Press