It started the way plenty of modern mysteries do: not with a dramatic confession, but with a small scrap of paper drifting to the floor. During a routine check-in tied to an ongoing ethics inquiry, a restaurant receipt slipped out of Daniel Mercer’s coat pocket—dated the same night he’d told investigators he grabbed a quick dinner alone. The itemized list wasn’t especially long, but it was specific: two entrées, a shared side, and a bottle of red.
Mercer, a 41-year-old business development director for a regional construction firm, tried to laugh it off. “Clients change plans all the time,” he said, according to two people familiar with the meeting, suggesting he may have ended up hosting someone unexpectedly. The problem, investigators say, is that he couldn’t recall who that someone was.
A simple receipt turns into a bigger question
The receipt came from Lantana Room, a popular downtown spot known for steaks, seafood, and a wine list that makes people pretend they can taste “leather and cherry” with a straight face. It was printed at 9:46 p.m. on a Thursday last month, and it showed a total of $186.40, including tax and tip. Not a wild splurge for client dinner standards, but not exactly a solo burger at the bar either.
Mercer had previously told the firm’s compliance team that he’d eaten alone after a late site visit, then returned home. He described it as “a quiet night” and said he used the time to answer emails. That timeline is now under review, largely because the receipt doesn’t match the vibe.
“Clients change plans all the time”—but which client?
When asked directly about the two entrées, Mercer reportedly said it was “possible” a client joined him after initially canceling. He also suggested that he may have ordered a second entrée “to take home,” though the receipt didn’t list a to-go charge and showed a single bottle of wine rather than a glass. He then paused when pressed for a name, saying he couldn’t remember who it was.
That’s the detail that’s stuck in everyone’s mind: not the wine, not the price, not even the fact that it was a Thursday. It’s the blank spot where a person should be. In a job built around relationships, forgetting the identity of a dinner companion is the sort of thing that makes people raise an eyebrow, then raise the other one.
Why investigators care about dinner details
The inquiry isn’t about whether Mercer likes cabernet. It centers on whether he properly disclosed meetings with potential vendors tied to upcoming bids—especially if any hospitality was exchanged. The firm has strict rules: client meals are allowed, but they must be documented with who attended, what was discussed, and whether anything could be seen as influencing a decision.
“A receipt by itself doesn’t prove misconduct,” said one corporate compliance consultant who reviewed a summary of the situation but wasn’t authorized to speak on the record about Mercer’s case. “But when it conflicts with a person’s account, it becomes a credibility issue. And credibility is basically the currency of internal investigations.”
The restaurant’s records and what they can (and can’t) show
Lantana Room staff declined to comment on specific customers, citing privacy. However, people familiar with restaurant operations noted that most establishments can confirm table numbers, server assignments, and whether a credit card was used—though they typically won’t release that without legal process. Surveillance footage, if it exists, is often overwritten within weeks.
According to a source briefed on the inquiry, Mercer paid with a corporate card, which is how the receipt was eventually matched to expense records. That also means the expense report should have required an attendee list. Investigators say Mercer’s initial submission listed “solo meal,” with no additional details.
Colleagues react: not scandal, exactly—just confusion
Inside Mercer’s office, the mood has been less “gotcha” and more “what is going on?” A coworker described him as usually meticulous, the kind of person who color-codes his calendar and remembers the names of clients’ dogs. “That’s why this feels weird,” the coworker said. “If he’d said, ‘I had dinner with so-and-so and forgot to put it on the form,’ that’s one thing. But not remembering at all?”
Another employee, who’s worked in sales roles, offered a more sympathetic take: weeks blur together, especially during bid season. “You can have three dinners in four nights and the conversations start to sound the same,” they said. Still, they admitted that forgetting a dinner companion when there’s a paper trail is “not a great look.”
Possible explanations—and why each has drawbacks
There are a few innocent possibilities. Mercer could’ve ordered food for someone else without dining with them, like a take-home meal for a family member, and the receipt simply doesn’t reflect that clearly. Or he might’ve been at a bar table where another person joined briefly, making it feel informal enough that he didn’t log it as a “meeting.”
But each explanation runs into the same wall: the wine. A bottle suggests time, company, and a shared experience—something more planned than an accidental overlap. Even if you’re the kind of person who drinks a whole bottle solo with confidence, it’s a detail investigators are unlikely to ignore.
What happens next
Sources say the company’s compliance team has asked Mercer to amend his expense report and provide any supporting context—emails, texts, calendar invites, anything that could show who he expected to meet and what changed. They’re also reviewing whether any vendors who had active bids around that date recorded a meeting with Mercer on their own logs. It’s the corporate equivalent of comparing notes, except everyone’s notes are a little self-serving.
Mercer, through a representative, said he’s cooperating and maintains there was “no improper intent.” He also reiterated the line that’s already become this story’s unofficial tagline: “Clients change plans all the time.” For now, the question isn’t whether plans changed. It’s whether Mercer can reconstruct whose plan changed with him.
A small slip that lingers
Most people have had that moment where a random receipt turns up and you think, “Oh right, that happened.” Usually it’s harmless—a coffee you don’t remember buying, a parking ticket you forgot to pay. In Mercer’s case, the receipt landed at the exact wrong time, and it didn’t just remind him of dinner; it challenged his version of the night.
Investigators aren’t treating it as a smoking gun, but they are treating it as a thread worth pulling. And as anyone who’s ever tugged on a loose thread in a sweater knows, you don’t always control how much comes undone.
More from Willow and Hearth:
Leave a Reply