Frank W. Tolman Sr.: Case Study

1876 Words 8 Pages
According to Grenier, the Tolmans sought other counsel to conclude the transaction with Farmer, and “public record reveals that Frank W. Tolman Sr. signed a discharge of the mortgage on September 20, 2013 indicating payment in full of the mortgage at that time.” Tolman Sr. alleges that during the sale, Grenier submitted notarized paperwork that he and his wife did not sign, and that the final price of the property was never discussed with him. Additionally, he asserts that Grenier has put him at risk for being sued by Farmer due to a “cloudy title”, and that Grenier’s actions have opened him up to a tax audit by several different agencies.
RESPONDENT’S ANSWER
In response to Tolman Sr’s allegations Grenier claims “there was no withholding
…show more content…
A Purchase and Sale Agreement was drafted and signed by Farmer; however Grenier’s file doesn’t contain a copy signed by the Tolmans or on their behalf by a POA or Guardian. It is unclear if the Purchase and Sale Agreement was ever properly executed.
Additionally, according to Grenier, he spoke constantly with Tolman Sr. regarding the price of the property, and he also communicated with Tolman Jr. In reviewing the file it does appear that he spoke with Tolman Sr. frequently, however those communications seem to be in the early 2000’s when the property first went on the market. Closer to the sale several of the drafted documents were sent to Tolman Jr for review, and there are several notations in the billing records regarding calls with Jr. It is entirely possible that there was a breakdown in communication between father and
…show more content…
The closed case appears to have been in reference to a dishonored check from Grenier’s IOLTA account. The incident referred to in this complaint occurred around the same time period that Grenier was trying to wrap up the Tolman case.
Two of the ACAP calls were not in reference to issues that would be investigated by this office. The other calls varied; one was in reference to a settlement offer, another involved vehicles allegedly stolen by one of Grenier’s clients, a third caller stated Grenier allegedly made false statements of material fact, and finally the call that came in reference to this

Related Documents