Contact
Boston
Providence
Research Misconduct
What we do.
We represent scientists from all over the country who are accused of research misconduct. Our experience and expertise in the field allow us to protect the reputations and livelihoods of those conducting groundbreaking scientific research and to protect the integrity of important scientific breakthroughs, and the data supporting them.
We also represent institutions that are confronted with allegations of research misconduct within their ranks and must conduct inquiries, and possibly investigations, into those allegations. We assist hospitals and universities in ensuring that their policies are up to date and in compliance with the requirements of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI). And we help ensure that those policies are vigorously implemented in the conduct of inquiries and investigations, so that institutions remain in the good graces of federal funding authorities.
Who We Are
Meet our experienced team that will represent you:
Bruce A. Singal, Esq.
Co-Chair, Research Misconduct Group
bsingal@barrettsingal.com
Elizabeth J. McEvoy, Esq.
Co-Chair, Research Misconduct Group
Editor, Research Misconduct Blog
emcevoy@barrettsingal.com
how we will represent you
frequently asked questions
What is research misconduct?
Traditionally, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Public Health Service has narrowly defined research misconduct as conduct that calls into question the integrity of a body of scientific work. This includes fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.... (for more detail)
Who is responsible for identifying research misconduct in the scientific community? Is this the job of the academic institutions?
Not exclusively. Although institutional recipients of federal funds play a central role in detecting and evaluating allegations of research misconduct, institutions are not the only bodies charged with policing scientific researchers. To be sure, institutions bear a heavy burden... (for more detail)
When must an institution contact ORI about allegations of research misconduct?
An institution must alert ORI whenever it conducts an “Institutional Investigation” (often the second phase launched after an institutional inquiry yields sufficient evidence of potential research misconduct) and must likewise provide ORI... (for more detail)
from the blog
In the rush to address COVID-19 institutions face increased risk of data manipulation and research fraud
With the rush to understand the novel coronavirus, and grapple with its widespread effects on public health, the pressure to deliver the “right” results continues to grow and new research studies seem to be published daily delivering new conclusions about the disease. While research-based studies and public health data are often accepted at face value as objective evidence – and rarely scrutinized closely by the public at large – those relying on this new wave of science should approach with caution.
Why Grantees Must be Prepared for Heightened Scrutiny of Conflicts of Interest in Foreign Support for US Research
United States law enforcement agencies are continuing to pursue their goal of cracking down on China’s efforts to capitalize on research funded by the United States and otherwise infiltrate American research institutions. On May 8, another researcher was charged with one count of wire fraud stemming from his failure to disclose his ties to the Chinese government and Chinese companies to his employer, the University of Arkansas, and in a NASA grant application.
Impact of COVID-19 on Reporting Foreign Components
In addressing the ever-growing list of obstacles posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, academic research centers with grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) must not lose sight of their continuing obligation to accurately report sources of foreign support provided to US-funded research, including whether any research conducted in the United States has a “foreign component.” With more and more research now being conducted remotely or at a social distance, NIH grant recipients must be proactive in identifying those activities that effectively transition work outside the United States and timely report any added foreign components to NIH for approval.
—Bruce A. Singal“In the 30 years I have been handling research misconduct cases—both for accused scientists and investigating institutions—they have become increasingly common and complex. The need is greater than ever now for teams of experienced lawyers and scientists to confront the legal and scientific issues that these cases present. I am pleased that our research misconduct department, fortified by teams of scientists, ably meets this need.”
representative successes
Secured three separate findings of “no misconduct” to close institutional misconduct proceedings brought against preeminent mathematician, psychologist, and kinesiologist, respectively, based on allegations of self-plagiarism and text recycling brought by Massachusetts and New York universities.
Secured a finding of “no misconduct” to reverse preliminary findings of research misconduct made against board-certified pediatric surgeon after completion by large California hospital of institutional investigation into allegations of falsification/fabrication.
Secured a finding of “no misconduct” on behalf of faculty member accused of manipulating and falsifying data in two articles published in leading national publication.
Secured favorable supervision agreement after extensive negotiations with the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) on behalf of a Ph.D. researcher twice accused of research misconduct and facing significant debarment from federal funding.
This website presents general information about Barrett & Singal and is not intended as legal advice nor should you consider it as such. You should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.
Please note that contacting Barrett & Singal by email, telephone or facsimile will not establish an attorney-client relationship, obligate us to act as your attorney or impose an obligation on either the law firm or the receiving lawyer to keep the transmitted information confidential. Completion of Barrett & Singal’s new client intake protocol, including without limitation the firm’s conflicts checking process and an engagement letter, is necessary to establish an attorney-client relationship. Absent a current attorney-client relationship with Barrett & Singal, any information or documents communicated or transmitted by you to Barrett & Singal will not be treated as confidential, secret or protected in any way. If you are not a current client of Barrett & Singal, please do not send any confidential information to us through this web site or otherwise concerning any potential or actual legal matter you have. Before providing any confidential information to us, you must obtain permission to do so from one of the firm’s lawyers. By clicking "Accept," you acknowledge that we have no obligation to maintain the confidentiality of any information you submit to us unless we already represent you or unless we have agreed to receive limited confidential material/information from you as a prospective client.
If you would like to discuss becoming a client, please contact one of our attorneys to arrange for a meeting or telephone conference. If you wish to disclose confidential information to a lawyer in the firm before an attorney-client relationship is established, the protections that the law firm will provide to such information from a prospective client should be discussed with the firm attorney before such information is submitted. Thank you for your interest in Barrett & Singal.