Ben Dolan: Even More Lies

Ben Dolan lied repeatedly in a Guaranty action by saying that the Order Appointing Receiver gave a Receiver Loan a priority position and thus required it to be repaid first before the borrower’s Loan.

After that was entered, the actual Receiver Loan Agreement was drafted and signed.  It had super priority “other than Permitted Encumbrances,” specifically excluding the borrower's loan which was a permitted encumbrance. Yet Dolan repeatedly made misrepresentations to Judge Alexander by omitting the exclusionary clause.  

Lies from Dolan's Motion for Summary Disposition – October 2, 2019

“Plaintiff applied the credit bid first to the receiver indebtedness as required by the Order Appointing Receiver...” (P7)

“Moreover, the Order Appointing Receiver, which all appellate courts have affirmed, set the priority of the Receiver Loan…. As such, the Order Appointing Receiver authorized Plaintiff to pay the Receiver Loan first, before applying the proceeds to the Original Loan indebtedness.” (P10)

“… The Washtenaw Court determined that as of, Sept 13, 2018, the balance on the Receiver Note, to which Plaintiff was first required to apply its credit bid, was $33,581,466.09…” (p19)

Dolan's Lies Worked as Can Be Seen from Judge Alexander's Opinion – December 11, 2019

Pursuant to the Order Appointing Receiver, the Receiver Loan was secured by a “senior, first-priority mortgage on the Receivership Property.” (Plaintiffs Exhibit 5, p. 5). Opinion, p 3

During an April 7, 2020 Telephonic Hearing, Ben Dolan made numerous material misrepresentations on the record including:

· Dolan falsely stated that “all of the documents that are related to this property have already been produced.” However, not only were there more recent documents available since the last material production was in April of 2018, but also there was evidence that the prior production was heavily cherry-picked and emails were withheld and concealed. The results of a Freedom of Information Act Request and third-party subpoenas in a subsequent action revealed emails which were wrongfully withheld. There is no telling how many incriminating emails were wrongfully withheld under Dolan’s watch.

· Dolan falsely stated that “O’Brien construction documents have been produced ad nauseum to the Defendant.” These was a blatant misrepresentation because the prior subpoena sent to O’Brien was quashed (via a Motion filed by Dolan), and O’Brien produced zero documents. 

· Dolan stated on the topic of his client, Canyon Partners, committing fraud that “[a]ll of those issues were litigated in the Washtenaw County case.”  Dolan’s statements were false and designed to prevent discovery of evidence of fraud. Fraud was not litigated in the Washtenaw Action and the Washtenaw Court made no findings whatsoever regarding fraud. Furthermore, the Washtenaw Court specifically denied all discovery relating to fraud, and in the end no court ordered the production of evidence about fraud committed by Dolan and his client.

· Regarding investors’ emails and documents, Dolan falsely stated that “all of the documents that are related to this property have already been produced.” In truth, the vast majority were concelaed as the Tokio Group confirmed that they had 1,600 documents involving the Project.

· Regarding subpoenas to law firms, Dolan stated, “all of the documents that those law firm’s clients have been produced” and “the only thing that the law firms could have that would be beyond the documents that were produced by their clients, would be privileged communications.”  Again, this was simply false. The subpoenas to the law firm’s clients were previously quashed, and the subject subpoenas only asked for non-privileged communications.