Chapter 6 - THE 2019 PAYMENT
The $180,000 payment was real.
The question was why.
Bank records came first.
Norwood Woodworks paid me $180,000 six years earlier.
Memo:
SEPARATION COMP / PROJECT CLOSEOUT.
The company general ledger classified it:
Executive separation expense.
Not membership redemption.
That mattered.
Tax treatment:
Ordinary compensation components and project bonus.
Not capital-gain purchase of membership interest.
My tax return matched.
That mattered more.
If the company bought my ownership interest, there should likely have been different tax reporting.
Not proof alone.
But strong inconsistency.
Then the business law firm produced its archived file.
Dad’s attorney had drafted a possible redemption agreement.
Draft only.
Unsigned.
Price under discussion:
$740,000.
Not $180,000.
That made sense.
Twenty percent of a company worth several million would not likely redeem for $180,000 without explanation.
The attorney’s notes said:
Larkin leaving employment; ownership retained unless separate purchase negotiated.
No separate purchase completed in file.
My pulse changed.
Then my brother produced what he called the final agreement.
The same scanned document the accountant sent.
My signature.
$180,000 consideration.
He claimed Dad negotiated a discount because I needed cash.
Possible.
He also produced minutes:
Members approve redemption of Larkin’s 20%.
Signed:
Dad.
My brother.
No me required if transfer already signed.
The minutes looked plausible.
Naomi asked for originals.
My brother said originals were missing.
Convenient.
Still not proof of fraud.
Then tax filings.
Norwood Woodworks partnership returns for the year after my supposed redemption.
My name still appeared as twenty-percent member.
The following year:
Gone.
Why delay a year?
Accountant said:
“Administrative lag.”
Possible.
He had relied on documents provided by my brother.
Did Dad know?
The accountant thought so.
Did he speak to Dad directly?
Not about redemption.
Problem.
Then the encrypted flash drive opened.
Mostly scanned business records.
No cinematic video confession.
One folder:
LARKIN EXIT.
Inside:
Draft redemption proposals.
Emails between Dad and my brother.
Dad:
He is leaving operations, not ownership.
Brother:
That makes governance impossible.
Dad:
Then buy him out properly.
Brother:
He’ll take 180 and walk.
Dad:
180 is separation compensation. Stop combining things because you want one clean answer.
I read that twice.
Then another email months later.
Brother:
We need Larkin off cap table before bank renewal.
Dad:
Then offer fair value.
Brother:
He won’t engage.
Dad:
That is not permission to pretend it happened.
My throat tightened.
Naomi said:
“Better.”
“Forgery?”
“Not yet.”
Then a final email from Dad two years later.
To his attorney.
I have learned that finance has been treating Larkin as redeemed in internal planning. I have not seen a valid completed transfer. Please verify before any estate planning assumes it.
The attorney responded:
Will review at annual meeting.
Annual meeting never happened.
Dad became ill.
Then died.
The uncertainty itself entered his estate.
My brother had not necessarily invented the issue after death.
He had been trying to erase my ownership for years.
The question remained:
May you like
Did he eventually obtain my signature legitimately?
Or create it?
