Dan Barham

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

Dan Barham previously served as the Managing Member of Barham Legal, LLC, a boutique law firm. In this leadership role, Dan played a pivotal part in integrating the strengths of all attorneys and staff and expanding the firm’s capabilities across a wide range of practice areas.

During his tenure, the firm provided sophisticated counsel to businesses, entrepreneurs, and individuals in matters involving new business financing, venture capital and securities law, mergers and acquisitions, creditor rights, litigation, real estate, estate and tax planning, state and local taxation, and tax controversies. His strategic insight and steady guidance helped the firm build a reputation for delivering practical, business-minded legal solutions.

Dan’s time at the firm solidified his reputation as both a skilled legal advisor and an effective business leader, known for combining deep legal knowledge with a commitment to exceptional client service.

REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS

• Manlangit et al v. FCI Lender Services Inc et al, No. 1:2019cv03265 – Document 67 (N.D. Ill. 2020) – successfully led FDCPA defense for loan servicer and mortgage holder against claim for breach of statute of limitations establishing case law determining limitations period and accrual date for “oral contracts” under Illinois law.
• In Re Estate of Robert McKeel Bone, In re Estate of Bone, 677 S.W.3d 644, 645 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2023) – successfully represented executor and trustee in defense of action for breach of fiduciary duty in trial court and in the Tennessee Court of Appeals. The Court held that the Trust did not prohibit or otherwise impose limitations on the decedent’s attorney to amend the Trust while acting in his capacity as the Executor’s attorney-in-fact pursuant to a power of attorney. Although the Trust did not expressly authorize the attorney to amend the Trust while the Executor was competent (only why incompetent), the Trust did not prohibit or otherwise impose limitations on his attorney-in-fact from amending the Trust while the Executor was competent. Further, the Executor’s power of attorney unequivocally evidenced the fact that one of the purposes of the attorney’s agency and powers under Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-15-602(e) was to amend any trust of the Executor. Click here to watch the Oral Arguments from this case.
• In Re Estate of Glen L. Roberts, Robertson County (TN) Chancery Court, No. CH22-CV-4, succeeded at trial defending executor against claims of breach of fiduciary duty and for denial of entire executor’s fee brought by residuary beneficiary of $33MM estate. In this case, the second largest estate proceeding ever in Robertson County, client-executor prevailed in obtaining a executor’s fee award of $825,000 (reduced only minimally due to interest on fees already paid to executor).
• Dan also has broad experience litigating hundreds of mortgage foreclosure cases on behalf of mortgage loan servicers, mortgage holders, and investors as well as creditor rights bankruptcy proceedings including lien avoidance and other adversary proceedings.