G. David Barnett

Of Counsel

Overview

G. David Barnett has over twenty-eight years of experience practicing law. He is licensed in Texas and Louisiana. His areas of practice include general civil litigation, personal injury, products liability, toxic torts, insurance coverage, premises liability and commercial litigation.  He earned his Juris Doctorate from Southern Methodist University School of Law in 1994.

Practice Areas

Commercial LitigationInsurance LawPersonal Injury DefensePremises LiabilityProducts LiabilityToxic Torts and Chemical Exposure

Bar Admissions

  • State Bar of Texas
  • State Bar of Louisiana
  • United States District Court for Eastern and Southern Districts of Texas

Education

  • Lamar University, BS Political Science, 1990
  • Southern Methodist University School of Law, JD 1994

Representative Experience

  • MANDAMUS – DISCOVERY OF CELL PHONE/SOCIAL MEDIA
    In re Indeco Sales, Inc, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 11859 (Tex. App. – Beaumont 2014, no pet.) – Mandamus involving discovery of cell phone data and social medial postings
  • SUMMARY JUDGMENT – FAILURE TO CONFORM TO PLEADINGS
    Maswoswe v. Nelson, 327 S.W.3d 889 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2010, no pet.) – Successful reversal of $4 million dollar summary judgment for failure to conform to pleadings.
  • INSURANCE CLAIM/ ANTI-TECHNICALITY STATUTE
    Temcharoen v. United Fire Lloyds, 293 S.W.3d 332 (Tex. App. – Eastland 2009, pet. denied) — Hurricane Rita insurance claim involving the application of the anti-technicality statute to void a policy when an insured manufactured receipts seeking re-imbursement of additional living expenses.
  • ATTORNEY DISQUALIFICATION
    In re Seven-O Corporation , 289 S.W.3d 384 (Tex. App. – Waco 2009, original proceeding) – Mandamus proceeding to disqualify an attorney who was representing both the plaintiffs and third party defendants in the same case. Note: Supreme Court of Texas denied a related mandamus filed by the opposing parties. Mandamus by plaintiffs to Supreme Court denied after full briefs on the merits. In re DeMott, No. 09-900 (August 20, 2010).
  • HURRICANE INSURANCE CLAIM / ATTORNEY’S FEES
    Ware v. United Fire Lloyds, No. 09-12-00061-CV, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 5730 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2013, no pet.) – Successful defense of an appeal regarding the award of attorney’s fees.
  • CONSUMER COMPLAINT / STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
    Book v. American Air Systems, Inc. 09-15-00538-CV; (December 30, 2015) – Successfully defended appeal on issue of statute of limitations in a construction defect case.
  • INSURANCE COVERAGE
    Colony Nat’l Ins. Co. v. United Fire & Cas. Co., No. 5:14CV10-JRG-CMC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43437 (E.D. Tex. 2016) – Coverage dispute involving duty to defend an additional insured in construction related personal injury case.
  • SUMMARY JUDGMENT – ABSENCE OF CONTROL IN COMMERCIAL TRUCKING CASE
    Elvir v. Brazos Paving, Inc., No. 13-16-00546-CV, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 8348, (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Aug. 31, 2017)) – Successfully defended summary judgment on issue of general contractor’s lack of control of subcontracting truck driver in significant personal injury case.

An experienced attorney is ready to help at Germer.

FIND YOUR COUNSEL
Meet Our Attorneys
Find Your Counsel