David A. Wyrick
David Wyrick is a senior associate at Chamblee Ryan whose focus is litigation and appeals.
David grew up in Durham, North Carolina and moved to San Antonio with his family when he was 10. While in San Antonio, David attended Winston Churchill High School, where he began to compete nationally at debate tournaments. In 1988, David placed second in the nation at the National Forensic League Final High School Debate Tournament. David continued competitively with debate while in college at the University of Texas at Austin, and in the 1991-1992 season, he placed second at the Dartmouth University National Collegiate Debate Tournament and was ranked eighth in the nation by the National Debate Tournament Committee.
While in law school at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, David received a Dean’s Achievement Award in Family Law. After graduating from law school, David completed a clerkship at Crofts, Callaway and Jefferson (now Crofts, and Callaway), a civil appellate boutique in San Antonio, Texas. After he completed the clerkship, David opened his own practice where he focused on civil litigation, civil appeals, and felony level criminal defense. David has extensive first and second chair jury trial experience and several of his civil appeals have been published in the Southwest Reporter.
Away from work, David enjoys nature, time with his family, dogs, and music composition.
Brenda Dove v. Ralph Brown, et al, 358 SW3d 681 (Texas App. – San Antonio, reversed and remanded, pet. rev. refused)(successfully reversed summary judgment rendered against Dove in her legal malpractice suit against her original attorney Ralph Brown, who had represented Dove in an auto accident suit; held, while joinder of responsible third parties cures expiration of statute of limitations, it does not necessarily put the complaining party in the same position they were in prior to joinder)
William Coale, et al v. Ronald Scott, et al, 331 SW3d 829 (Tex. App. – Amarillo, aff’d, no pet.)(successfully Represented Ronald Scott et al, at trial and on appeal securing jury verdict on easement submission ensuring right to traverse a private roadway; subsequent to judgment on the jury verdict, Coale entered into a Rule 11 agreement with Scott, which Coale then tried to abrogate; held, the trial court was within its discretion to adopt and enforce the Rule 11 agreement)