relay the requests to the Chicago office.


6
Work continued on the project through 1974 and into 1975.  Several times during this period, Parliament sent an accountant to St. Petersburg to review the books and records of Hanson with respect to his accounting for the funds which had been advanced.  Although the accountant found that Hanson's books and records were poorly kept, neither he nor any representative of Parliament complained to Hanson about bookkeeping deficiencies.  After the construction was substantially completed and certificates of occupancy were obtained, Hanson's employment was terminated by Parliament.


7
Parliament then commenced this action against Hanson.  Parliament contended that Hanson had a fiduciary duty to account for the funds which had been advanced and on this basis, Parliament sought an accounting and damages.the testimony of a former employee of Hanson, who later became an employee of Parliament's new contractor.  This employee had access to some of the books and records of Hanson.  He testified that he began to get suspicious regarding the money which Parliament was disbursing to Hanson.  He claimed that Hanson was diverting some of the money for uses unrelated to the Dean Mohr project.  When questioned about specific instances of monetary diversion by Hanson, the employee was unable to remember.  However, he stated that he had made certain notes concerning these transactions which would aid his memory.  The district court allowed voir dire on this subject.  The witness then testified that he had regularly kept logs while he was employed