Nora had retained copies of her own correspondence and work product, subject to review of her confidentiality obligations.
She also remembered an unusual instruction about a parcel description.
The supervisor wanted every invoice to refer to the access lane as an acquired project asset.
Nora had asked for the acquisition date.
The supervisor answered that the paperwork would catch up later.
Mark read Rachel’s summary at his desk and felt his face grow hot.
For months Daniel had spoken as though the lane was already his.
The invoices suggested that the assumption had been built into the project’s financial records before any valid agreement existed.
Mark wanted to call Daniel and demand an explanation.
Instead he placed the summary in his case folder and went to check the afternoon orders.
The temptation to confront Daniel was familiar.
He had felt it on the night Vanessa walked out in her red dress.
He had felt it again when he discovered the signature that was not his.
Every time he resisted, another piece of evidence arrived without needing an argument.
Rachel later arranged a conference call with the investor’s counsel and an independent forensic accountant named Miriam Holt.
Miriam explained that the review would compare invoices, bank records, contract dates, and the actual services delivered.
She would not treat a suspicious description as proof of a particular person’s intent.
She would identify transactions that required explanation and preserve a clear record of how each conclusion was reached.
Mark appreciated her restraint.
He had spent enough nights imagining what Daniel deserved.
He needed someone who cared more about what could be established than about what would feel satisfying.
Miriam asked Mark for the dates when Westbridge first contacted him about the lane.
He supplied copies of letters, calendar entries, and the first proposal Daniel had sent through Vanessa.
One letter contained an offer to purchase an easement for a modest sum.
A later document described the same easement as an existing obligation of the shop.
The transition had happened without a signed agreement between them.
Miriam circled the dates on her copy of the timeline.
She said the sequence would help her determine whether the expense entries were consistent with the actual negotiations.
After the call Rachel asked how Mark was sleeping.
He admitted that he often woke before dawn and mentally rehearsed arguments with people who were not there.
Rachel suggested he let the professionals carry the parts of the dispute that belonged to them.
Mark smiled and said he was trying.
That evening he left the shop at a reasonable hour for the first time in weeks.
