Photo of John Zen Jackson

Of Counsel, Healthcare and Litigation

John focuses his practice on civil litigation including trial and appellate advocacy, primarily in the healthcare area, as well as in healthcare regulatory and compliance matters. He has represented healthcare providers in the defense of professional liability claims, licensure and credentialing disputes, reimbursement disputes, insurance coverage and insurance fraud cases, qui tam actions under the Federal False Claims Act, and hospital privilege disputes including termination litigation. He has been responsible for matters involving medical staff privileges at the internal hearing level and in subsequent court litigation. He has additional experience as a hearing officer in hospital privilege disputes and in drafting medical staff bylaws. He has authoritative expertise in medical liability, biomedical ethics, and end-of-life issues.

Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney, John has litigated matters in judicial forums, trying numerous jury trials to verdict, and has appeared extensively before state administrative agencies and hospital credentialing committees. He has assisted healthcare entities seeking to outsource the handling of physician investigations, and physicians facing investigative inquiries and disciplinary charges before the Board of Medical Examiners (BME). He handles the full range of BME proceedings, including responding to an initial inquiry and appearing at a preliminary evaluation, responding to Orders to Show Cause and temporary suspension applications, hearings in the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), addressing the BME on disposition and discipline issues, argument of appeals before the Appellate Division, and appearances before the New Jersey Supreme Court.

Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Contact information:

jjackson@greenbaumlaw.com | 732.476.3336 | vCard

For more information visit the Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLP website.

Two lessons emerge from the Appellate Division’s December 5, 2025 opinion in Weissman v. Li. The first is a reiteration of the importance of precision of the language used in questioning witnesses. The other is rejection of the reflexive reluctance to question one’s own witness in a pretrial deposition.

This is a medical malpractice

An article in the August 9, 2025, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine highlights the opportunity, if not the responsibility, of the bar in the private law sector to fill the gaps in healthcare access, quality, and accountability resulting from the Trump administration’s deregulation efforts regarding federal administrative agencies and legislation. Moreover, the

The January 30, 2025 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine contains an article entitled “Providing Interstate Telehealth Abortion Services to Patients in Restrictive States.” In the second sentence, the authors write: “The complexities of telehealth regulation in the United States often result in areas of liability and concern for clinicians providing