Photo of John W. Kaveney

Partner, Healthcare and Litigation Departments

Mr. Kaveney focuses his practice in the area of healthcare law, representing a range of clients that includes for-profit and non-profit hospitals and health systems, academic medical centers, individual physicians and physician groups, ambulatory surgery centers, ancillary service providers, medical billing companies, skilled nursing and rehabilitation facilities, behavioral health centers and pharmacies.

His practice in the healthcare field encompasses advising healthcare clients on corporate compliance matters, including the implementation of new, and the assessment of existing, corporate compliance programs. He also assists healthcare clients with compliance audits and investigations, as well as guiding clients through the self-disclosure and repayment processes. Finally, he provides general legal advice concerning compliance and regulatory matters under state and federal healthcare laws.

In the area of information privacy and data security, Mr. Kaveney advises healthcare clients on issues arising under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH). This includes the implementation and assessment of privacy and security policies and procedures to ensure the proper protection and utilization of protected health information both by healthcare providers and the business associates with which they contract. In addition, he represents healthcare clients in investigating, reporting, and remediating information breaches and the liability such breaches create under various information privacy and security laws.

Additionally, Mr. Kaveney provides counsel on Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement matters before the Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services and the Provider Reimbursement Review Board, as well as assisting clients in civil litigation and with professional licensing and medical staffing concerns.

Contact information:

jkaveney@greenbaumlaw.com | 973.577.1796 | vCard | LinkedIn

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

As reported this past week by GovInfoSecurity, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, signed into law in late December 2022, included a key provision to help ensure the cybersecurity of medical devices by their manufacturers. GovInfoSecurity interviewed Dr. Suzanne Schwartz, director of the FDA’s Office of Strategic Partnerships and Technology Innovation, Center for Devices

The United States District Court’s 2021 ruling in Milton S. Hershey Medical Center v. Becerra is one example of a successful legal challenge to federal agency action, but a number of more recent cases reaffirm that lower federal courts may not hesitate to overturn agency action deemed outside the bounds of the agency’s legislative authority.

Although the Hospital Price Transparency Rule – which requires hospitals to make public a comprehensive list of charges for items and services – has been in effect for almost two years, the Congressional House Committee on Energy and Commerce advises that hundreds of warning letters and requests for civil monetary penalties to hospitals that are

On November 1, 2022, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued two important final rules: one that included updates and policy changes for Medicare payments under the Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) and aspects of Medicare Part B, and the other that finalized Medicare payment rates for hospital outpatient and ambulatory surgical center (ASC)

In recognition of National Cybersecurity Awareness Month, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) issued its October 2022 Cybersecurity Newsletter addressing best practices and tips for compliance with HIPAA’s Security Rule. The Newsletter discussed the ever-increasing need for members of the healthcare industry to be vigilant in their practices, as research shows a 42% increase in

As we reported back in July on this blog, the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year held that the federal government improperly lowered drug reimbursement payments to certain 340B hospitals that serve low-income communities. Following that decision, the case was remanded back to the lower courts for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s ruling.

On