Joe Huff focuses his practice on civil litigation law. He has had significant involvement in a broad range of business and commercial litigation matters in federal and state courts, to include construction related matters and requirements contracts. Much of Mr. Huff’s litigation experience has come in the context of counseling and representing hospital systems, physicians and physician groups in litigation and operational matters. His experience includes representing hospitals and physicians in: commercial litigation arising from business transactions in healthcare, to include the purchase and sale of hospitals; internal investigations arising from regulatory inquiries (Stark and False Claims Act); self-disclosure of hospital billing and physician contract practices deemed subject to regulatory scrutiny; medical malpractice matters; prosecution of physician privilege revocation proceedings on behalf of hospital clients; defense of qui tam actions against hospitals; EMTALA litigation; and HIPAA matters. In addition to his complex commercial litigation practice, Mr. Huff has also been involved in a number of substantial plaintiff’s personal injury matters and has defended personal injury actions in a variety of context to included aviation cases, premises liability and industrial accidents.
Mr. Huff was recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® in 2020 and the eight years immediately preceding. He was also recognized as a 2016 and 2019 "Augusta Lawyer of the Year" in the area of Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants by The Best Lawyers in America®. Mr. Huff was named a Georgia "Super Lawyer" in the area of Business Litigation in 2012, 2013 and 2014 by Super Lawyers magazine. Mr. Huff is AV® rated by Martindale-Hubbell.*
*CV, BV, and AV are registered certification marks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedure's standards and policies.
Represented hospital system in defending malpractice cases arising out of a wide variety of medical and nursing practices.
Represented an institutional health care system in a qui tam action brought by a former staff anesthesiologist who alleged improper billing of certified registered nurse anesthetist services. Plaintiff dismissed the case following filing of motions to dismiss.
Represented hospital system in investigating potential Stark and anti-kickback law violations and subsequently in the preparation and submission of a self-disclosure to the Office of Inspector General. Representation resulted in a favorable settlement for the client.
Insights View All
University of Georgia School of Law, J.D. (1991)
Presbyterian College, B.A., English (1988)
summa cum laude
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1991)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (1991)
U.S. District Court - Middle District of Georgia (1991)
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Georgia (1991)
Georgia Supreme Court (1991)
Court of Appeals of Georgia (1991)
All State and Superior Courts of Georgia (1991)
Augusta Symphony, Former Board President, Executive Board, Counsel
Miller Theater Board, Vice President
Augusta Ronald McDonald House, Former President of the Board of Directors
Covenant Presbyterian Church, Elder
Leadership Augusta, Class of 1996
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.