Samual A. Garner

  1. People /

Samual A. Garner

Samual A. Garner

Associate


Washington
  1. People /

Samual A. Garner

Samual A. Garner

Associate


Washington

Samual A. Garner

Associate

Washington

T: +1 202 508 6039

VcardVcard
Download PDFDownload PDF
Print
Share

Biography

Sam is a member of the firm’s commercial disputes, appellate, class actions, and data privacy teams. He is also a fellow with the Cordell Institute for Policy in Medicine & Law at Washington University in St. Louis. Sam was a summer associate with the firm in 2018.

During law school, he was an articles editor for the Jurisprudence Review and a Student Fellow for the Cordell Institute.

Prior to law school, Sam spent eight years at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) gaining extensive experience in the ethics and regulation (i.e., 45 CFR 46) of clinical trials. From 2008 to 2011, he was a health science policy analyst in the Offices of Science Policy (OSP) and from 2011 to 2016, he was a bioethicist for the Division of AIDS (DAIDS), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). During this time, Sam was also a member of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) and NIAID Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), where he reviewed a broad range of genetics and infectious disease studies.

Civic Involvement & Honors

  • CALI Award Recipient—top grades in Legal Research I & II (2017) and American Legal History (2019)
  • Dean’s Fellow (full tuition, merit-based award)
  • Washington Award (merit-based stipend)
  • Judge Myron D. Mills Administrative Law Award (awarded for law review article)

Admissions

  • Missouri, 2019

    Practicing in Washington, D.C. under the supervision of members of the D.C. Bar pending admission in the District of Columbia

Education

  • Washington University in St. Louis, J.D., cum laude, 2019
  • University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, M.A., 2009
  • Connecticut College, B.A., magna cum laude, 2007

Related Practice Areas

  • Business & Commercial Disputes

  • Intellectual Property and Technology

  • Mass Torts & Product Liability

  • Data Privacy & Security

  • Corporate

  • Investigations

  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution

  • Regulation, Compliance & Advisory

  • Class Actions & Mass Torts

  • Financial Services

  • Catastrophic Accidents

  • Consumer Fraud

  • Consumer Products

  • Food, Ag & Nutrition

  • Insurance (Class Actions)

  • Pharmaceutical & Medical Devices (Class Actions)

  • Pharmaceutical & Medical Devices (Mass Torts)

  • Appellate

  • Class Actions

Related Insights

View All Related Insights

Insights
Jun 10, 2021

Supreme Court Clarifies That Violation of Computer Use Policy Does Not Violate Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

Resolving a circuit split in the interpretation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA) – an anti-hacking statute – the Supreme Court recently held that the CFAA does not impose liability on individuals who access information they are otherwise authorized to access even though they have improper motives.

Related Insights

Insights
Sep 12, 2023
A survey of the US AI regulatory landscape
Insights
Jun 30, 2023
Expansion of Connecticut Data Privacy Act
Insights
Sep 29, 2022
Recently Amended Draft Federal Privacy Legislation Continues to Receive Support & Criticism
Insights
Mar 08, 2022
Comparison of the CCPA & CPRA with Pending 2021 Comprehensive Federal Privacy Legislation – S. 2134
Insights
Jan 28, 2022
Happy Data Privacy Day from the BCLP Global Privacy & Security Team
Insights
Jan 20, 2022
Comparison of the CCPA & CPRA with Pending 2021 Comprehensive Federal Privacy Legislation – S. 1494
Insights
Dec 30, 2021
Comparison of the CCPA & CPRA with Pending 2021 Comprehensive Federal Privacy Legislation – H.R. 1816
Insights
Oct 15, 2021
The FTC Steps Up its Game on Endorsement Enforcement
Insights
Jun 10, 2021
Supreme Court Clarifies That Violation of Computer Use Policy Does Not Violate Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Resolving a circuit split in the interpretation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA) – an anti-hacking statute – the Supreme Court recently held that the CFAA does not impose liability on individuals who access information they are otherwise authorized to access even though they have improper motives.