×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell Professional AssociationAssociate
no photo
Pro

Jeffrey J. Grosholz

Not yet reviewed

101 North Monroe Street, Suite 120, P.O. Box 10507, Tallahassee, FL 32302-2507

Employment and Labor, Government and Administrative, Education and 3 more

About Jeffrey J. Grosholz

Jeffrey Grosholz focuses his practice on education law, primarily aimed at representing school boards, as well as all aspects of education, employment, and labor law for clients in both the public and private sector. He currently serves as the school board attorney for the Baker County School Board in Florida. Jeffrey also handles constitutional litigation, and defends state and local government agencies against allegations of civil rights and tort violations. Jeffrey also represents clients in the pesticides and pest control industry.

Jeffrey participated in the RumbergerKirk Summer Associate Program in 2018. After graduation he clerked for the Honorable James A. Edwards of Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal. While in law school, he served as a judicial extern for the Honorable Mark E. Walker of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Awards & Honors

•Listed in Best Lawyers in America, Ones to Watch, Labor and Employment Law-Management; Litigation-Labor and Employment; Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants, 2023-2026

Articles & Presentations

•Author, 'Supreme Court Provides Further Guidance on Free Exercise Claims in Public Schools,' Florida Education Law Journal, Winter 2026, a publication from The Florida Bar Education Law Committee
•Author, 'Conflict Certified: District Split on Impact Rule Comes Before Supreme Court,' The Reporter, a publication of The Florida Bar Appellate Practice Section, September 2025
•Author, 'Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Fulfilling Presuit Conditions for Civil Rights Claims,' July 2025
•Presenter, 'When the Camera Rolls: What Government Entities Need to Know About First Amendment Auditors,' Florida School Board Attorney Association Conference (FSBAA), June 2025
•Presenter, 'Navigating First Amendment Audits: Legal Insights and Practical Advice,' Preferred Governmental Insurance Trust, June 2025
•Panelist, 'AI, Accommodations & Compliance: What Employers Need to Know in 2025,' Big Bend SHRM Annual HR Tallahassee Conference, April 2025
•Author, 'Supreme Court Appears Split on Whether to Approve Religious Charter School,' April 2025
•Co-author, 'Court Finds School Board Erred in Punishing Teacher for Political Activity on Social Media,' February 2025
•Presenter, 'First Amendment Auditors,' Preferred Governmental Insurance Trust, February 2025
•Co-author, 'Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Nation’s First Religious Charter School,' January 2025
•Co-author, 'Supreme Court Says Forced Job Transfers Must Cause Harm, But it Doesn’t Have to be Significant,' April 2024
•Panelist, 'FSU Alumni Clerkship Panel and Mixer,' Florida State University College of Law, March 2024
•Author, 'SCOTUS Clarifies Scope of Social Media Liability for Public Officials,' March 2024
•Author, 'The Importance of Being a Five-Tool Player: Skills Young Lawyers Need to Succeed,' FDLA Trial Advocate, Volume 42, No. 3, December 2023
•Co-author, 'U.S. Supreme Court Decides Major Personal Jurisdiction Case: Impact in Florida Remains to Be Seen,' July 2023
•Participant, 'Legal Services of North Florida Law Day Celebration Debate,' May 2023
•Presenter, 'First Amendment Wheel Doesn’t Stop Spinning: What School Boards Need to Know,' Consortium of State School Boards Association's Inaugural Conference, April 2023
•Author, 'Fourth DCA: Florida Sunshine Law’s Strict Compliance vs Public Records Act Good Faith Exception,' March 2023
•Co-author, “Eleventh Circuit Finds Medicare Secondary Payer Act Not Preempted by Procedural Requirements,” March 2023
•Presenter, 'First Amendment Wheel Doesn’t Stop Spinning: What School Boards Need to Know,' Florida School Board Attorneys Association, February 2023
•Co-author, 'The Who, What, Where and Why of Fla.’s Public Records Law, and How to Avoid Pitfalls,' Daily Business Review, January 2023
•Host/Presenter, 'Florida Public Records Laws: Avoiding the Pitfalls and Mistakes that Lead to Expensive and Costly Litigation,' Legally Qualified Podcast, October 2022
•Co-Author, 'First Amendment Wheel Doesn’t Stop Spinning: What Risk Managers Need to Know for the New School Year,' September 2022
•Author, 'U.S. Supreme Court Okays Religious School Tuition Vouchers: Gives Official “Thumbs Up” to Florida’s School Choice Laws,' August 2022
•Author, 'Freely Flying Flags Can Lead to Flagrant Free Speech Fouls,' August 2022
•Author, 'Ding Dong! Lemon’s Dead: SCOTUS Clarifies Establishment Clause,' August 2022
•Author, 'Eleventh Circuit Reiterates Availability of Postjudgment Rule 11 Sanctions,' July 2022
•Co-author, 'Second DCA Finds School Board Investigative Communications Not Entitled to Attorney-Client Privilege: Provides Lifeline to District Employees,' July 2022
•Co-Author, 'SCOTUS Rejects OSHA “Vax or Test” Rule, But Allows Narrower Healthcare Mandate,' January 14, 2022
•Co-Author, 'Governor DeSantis Signs New Covid-19 Related Laws that Have Immediate Effect in Florida,' November 2021
•Author, 'Cursing Cheerleader Wins at Supreme Court, but Schools Retain Ability to Punish Certain Off-Campus Speech,' June 2021
•Presenter, '2021 Update: Disciplining Students for Online and Off-Campus Speech,' NBI Seminar, June 2021
•Author, 'Justices Show Little Spirit for Expanding Tinker: SCOTUS Wrestles with Appropriate Standard for Regulating Off-Campus Student Speech,' April 2021
•Co-Author, 'Fifth DCA Finds Florida’s Private Whistleblower Act Requires Proof of But-For Causation,' December 15, 2020
•Author, Note, In the Shadows: Third-Party Litigation Funding Agreements and the Effect Their Nondisclosure Has on Civil Trials, 47 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. Issue 2 (forthcoming 2020)
•Author, Note, The Shadow of Kiobel and Jesner: An Examination of the Alien Tort Statute and Bringing It Back Into the Light, 46 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 1009 (2019)

Jeffrey's News and Insights

02.26.2026
Education

Supreme Court Provides Further Guidance on Free Exercise Claims in Public Schools

This article was originally published in the Florida Education Law...

Photo: Shutterstock.com/Ground Picture

11.02.2025
Beyond the Bio

Rooted in Opportunity: Jeff Grosholz Reflects on Five Years at RumbergerKirk

Jeff’ Grosholz’s journey with RumbergerKirk began as a summer associate...

11.07.2025
Events

What Recent Court Rulings Mean for School Boards: Jeffrey Grosholz Weighs In

Jeffrey Grosholz will discuss recent decisions by the United States...

09.23.2025
Appellate

Conflict Certified: District Split on Impact Rule Comes Before Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of Florida announced on August 21, 2025,...

08.21.2025
Firm News

27 RumbergerKirk Attorneys Named to the 2026 edition of The Best Lawyers in America

Dan Gerber and Leonard Dietzen Named “Lawyer of the Year;”...

07.21.2025
Employment and Labor

Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Fulfilling Presuit Conditions for Civil Rights Claims

On July 10, 2025, the Supreme Court of Florida held...

06.13.2025
Events

Jeffrey Grosholz Provides Insight on First Amendment Auditors

Jeffrey Grosholz discussed guidance and best practices when faced with...

06.05.2025
Events

First Amendment Auditors: Guidance for Florida’s Public Entities

On June 5, more than 275 Preferred members participated in...

05.28.2025
Education

Supreme Court Denies First Religious Charter School, Leaves Question Over Constitutionality Unresolved

On May 22, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued...

Photo: Shutterstock.com/Davizro Photography

05.01.2025
Education

Supreme Court Appears Split on Whether to Approve Religious Charter School

On April 30, 2025, the United States Supreme Court heard...

Photo:Shutterstock/Billion Photos

 

Jeffrey J. Grosholz (Tallahassee, Florida) View website

Reviews for Jeffrey J.

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Other 6
    • Employment and Labor
    • Government and Administrative
    • Education
    • External General Counsel Services
    • Pesticides and Pest Control
    • Appellate

Practice Details

  • Languages
    Japanese
  • Firm Information
    Position
    Associate
    Firm Name
    Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell Professional Association
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Notable Cases: MSPA Claims 1, LLC v. Tower Hill Prime Insurance Co.: RumbergerKirk attorneys Nicole Smith, Samantha Duke,
    Jeffrey Grosholz secured a final summary judgment in MSPA Claims 1, LLC v. Tower Hill Prime Insurance Co. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. Plaintiff, an alleged three times removed assignee of a now-defunct Medicare Advantage Organization, sued Tower Hill Prime Insurance Company
    Tower Hill Claims Services, LLC, for double damages under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. Plaintiff claimed Tower Hill was a primary payer under the Act, but that it had failed to make payments for Medicare-covered services provided to the original assignor's enrollee. This was one of a plethora of class action lawsuits Plaintiff
    its related entities have filed in Florida, as well as elsewhere nationwide, seeking recovery under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act for payments that entities such as Tower Hill should have allegedly paid.
    Plaintiff's case was predicated on a single Medicare Advantage enrollee's claim, although it alleged to have more. Early attempts by Plaintiff to force Tower Hill to engage in data matching that would, Plaintiff argued, prove the existence of these alleged other claims were denied by the court. After extensive discovery, both parties moved for summary judgment. Plaintiff also moved for class certification. Following a hearing on the competing motions for summary judgment, the court requested supplemental briefing on the applicable statute of limitations. Namely, the statute of limitations for the federal government's cause of action under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is three years, whereas the Act is silent as to the private cause of action's limitations period. The court thus asked the parties for argument on what the applicable statute of limitations should be. Both parties submitted additional briefing on the matter, with Tower Hill arguing, in part, that the government's three-year statute of limitations should be borrowed while Plaintiff argued the six-year statute of limitations applicable to actions brought under the False Claims Act should be used.
    After consideration, the court granted in part
    denied in part Tower Hill's motion for summary judgment, finding that Tower Hill Claims Services, as a third-party administrator, was entitled to summary judgment. But the court rejected Tower Hill's argument that the government's three-year statute of limitations was applicable
    the court, however, left the question of the applicable statute of limitations open. Tower Hill subsequently moved for reconsideration, arguing that if the court were to borrow from state law, i.e., if it used Florida's general limitations statute, a four-year statute of limitations would apply
    Plaintiff's claim would still be time-barred. The court decided to construe Tower Hill's motion for reconsideration as a new motion for summary judgment,
    allowed the parties to provide further briefing on the matter.
    On the eve of the hearing on Plaintiff's motion for class certification, the court h
    ed down an order granting Tower Hill's motion for summary judgment. Specifically, the court found that Florida's limitations statute was more analogous to the Medicare Secondary Payer Act's private cause of action than the False Claims Act,
    thus a four-year statute of limitations applied. Having determined the appropriate statute of limitations, the court accordingly found that Plaintiff's case could not survive because outside its single, time-barred exemplar claim, Plaintiff could not point to any other specific claim. As such, the court found Tower Hill was entitled to final summary judgment.
    The court's ruling is significant in that it represents one of the only instances where a court has analyzed-
    actually answered-the question of the applicable statute of limitations in a case brought under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act's private cause of action. This is noteworthy because, while the passage of the PAID Act in December 2020 has made it easier for primary payers to learn of the existence of Medicare Advantage Organizations-
    , hopefully, to avoid instances where enrollees' costs are not reimbursed by the proper entity-the continued absence of a statute of limitations for the private cause of action within the language of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act itself means entities still must turn to the courts
    caselaw for this answer. Accordingly, this ruling in favor of Tower Hill st
    s as a marker entities can point to in defending claims such as these.
  • Additional Links
    https://www.rumberger.com/people/jeffrey-j-grosholz/

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    2019, Florida
    Memberships

    Professional

    •The Florida Bar
    •Education Law Committee (2023-2024)

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Florida State College of Law
    Class of 2019
    J.D.
    magna cum laude; Order of the Coif; Book Awards — Contemporary Topics in Tort Law, European Union Law, Public International Law, Space Law, Supreme Court Role Play, Torts, Trial Practice; Florida State University Law Review, Article Selection Editor, Vol. 46; Mock Trial Team, Member
    Other Education
    Florida State University
    Class of 2010
    B.A.
    History, cum laude

Activity

Legal Community Contributions

Email Jeffrey J. Grosholz

Case type is required.
A valid zip code is required.
A valid city is required.
State is required.
Country is required.
Outside the US or Canada?
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

Contact Information

First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
City:
State:
Country:
Case Description:
Contact Information
First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Phone Number:
Return to Profile

Attorneys FAQs

  • What year was this attorney first admitted to the bar?
    Jeffrey J. Grosholz was admitted in 2019 to the State of Florida.
  • How many attorneys are in this law firm?
    Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell Professional Association has 87 attorneys at this location.
  • What year was this attorney's law firm established?
    Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell Professional Association was established in 1978.

Attorney information displayed in this FAQ section is based upon information the lawyer has included on their profile, in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals.

These FAQs include information about a lawyer's background, but do not evaluate their knowledge of the law, past performance on individual cases, personality, or communication skills.

It is solely the responsibility of lawyers and law firms to ensure that any information they provide complies with all applicable laws and rules of professional conduct.

You should be aware that the information we rely upon may not be comprehensive, or frequently updated.

Always research the lawyer further to get a better understanding of their license credentials, disciplinary status, background, and experience.

Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions