Jay P. Holland

"We are aggressive, creative, and knowledgeable about the law. But most importantly, we listen. We pride ourselves on spending the time to develop personal relationships that enable us to truly understand our clients' situations."
Jay P. Holland
Rated by Super Lawyers

loading ...



Greenbelt, MD
P: 240-553-1198

Rockville, MD
P: 240-399-7900

Jay P. Holland


Proudly displayed in Jay Holland’s office is a plaque that reads: “The Best Lawyer a Client Could Ever Have.” The customized award was a gift from a client at the end of a seven-and-a-half–year legal battle. The success wasn’t just winning the case in court; it was also serving as a loyal ally, protector, and advocate for the client throughout his long journey to achieve justice.

A principal in Joseph, Greenwald & Laake’s Civil Litigation Group and chair of the firm’s Labor, Employment, and Qui Tam Whistleblower practice, Jay Holland is a renowned employment and qui tam litigator known for taking on tough cases and achieving exceptional results. Jay counsels clients in individual and class action cases involving gender and race discrimination and sexual harassment, violations of the wage and hour laws, and wrongful termination. Jay has an active qui tam practice, representing whistleblowers in actions under the federal False Claims Act.

Jay has been lead counsel in several high-profile cases that have received national media attention. In Clark v. Prince George’s County, he represented a group of 64 highly qualified firefighters whose employment offers had been rescinded based on the county’s illegal affirmative action policy. Jay obtained the extraordinary relief of an affirmative injunction requiring the county to hire the firefighters. Jay also successfully blocked the Maryland Board of Elections’ attempts to oust Elections Administrator Linda Lamone for political reasons.

Jay has achieved extraordinary success in several high-profile qui tam cases under the False Claims Act, resulting in settlements of hundreds of millions of dollars. For example, Jay represented the relator in the case of United States ex. rel Hallivis v. Allergan. In that matter, Jay pursued a whistleblower case against Allergan, the maker of Botox®, for off-label marketing of Botox for pharmaceutical purposes. Allergan ultimately pled guilty to criminal charges and settled the case for a total of $600 million in civil and criminal fines. Jay also successfully pursued a case of off-label marketing and misrepresentation against the spinal device maker Trans1, which resulted in a total settlement of $6 million. He also prosecuted and resolved qui tam and retaliation matters for millions of dollars on behalf of his clients in cases involving over-billing on Defense Department contracts and failing to pay government-required wages to employees on multiple government contracts.

Jay has obtained favorable results for government and private-sector employees in severe sexual harassment and retaliation cases, resulting in millions of dollars in settlements and other relief for his clients, including job transfers, reinstatement of leave, and reimbursement of attorneys’ fees.

Jay is known for providing superior service to all his clients. One client said of him, “Thank you for taking the time to explain the law, strategy and our case. You have a natural ability to explain things in a very methodical and informative way. Kudos on that talent!”

Jay is a frequent lecturer and writer on labor, employment law, and False Claims Act cases and is often called upon to present to bar associations and other organizations.  He also is frequently quoted in the media on employment and qui tam cases. He co-chairs the Employment Law Section of the Prince George’s County Bar Association and is active in the Employment Law sections of the Maryland State Bar Association and American Bar Association.

Outside of work, Jay enjoys spending time with his wife, daughter, and son. He is an avid skier and enjoys other outdoors activities as well.

Direct Dial: 240-553-1198

The use of the Internet or this form of communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

  • Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, J.D., 1988
  • University of Massachusetts, B.A., 1984
Bar Admissions
  • Maryland, 1988
  • District of Columbia, 1989
Court Admissions
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
  • U.S. Court of Appeals Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • U.S. Supreme Court