Citizens Trust Company - Terre Haute, IN

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: trust company
Start Date: March 1, 1928*
Location: Terre Haute, Indiana (39.467, -87.414)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: 95733982

Response Measures

None

Description

Article states the Citizens Trust Company of Terre Haute 'closed March 1928' and refers to a receiver and court litigation over claims. No run or reopening is mentioned; the bank remained in receivership/closed. Cause of suspension/closure is not specified in the article, so classified as 'other'.

Events (3)

1. March 1, 1928* Suspension

Cause Details: Article only states the bank 'closed March 1928' and later had a receiver; no specific cause (rumor, correspondent failure, government action, etc.) is given.
Newspaper Excerpt: claimed to have in the Citizens Trust company Terre Haute when closed March 1928
Source: newspapers

2. December 22, 1931 Other

Newspaper Excerpt: INDIANAPOLIS, Dec. ... was ruled today the Supreme court. The decision reversed the ruling the Knox Superior court ... the funds arising from their sale had been dissipated and that part came into the hands of the receiver, therefore, court ruled, claim was preferred.
Source: newspapers

3. * Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: part came into the hands of the receiver, therefore, court ruled, claim was preferred.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. December 22, 1931 The Vincennes Sun-Commercial Vincennes, IN

Article from The Vincennes Sun-Commercial, December 22, 1931

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Here Ruling Reversed by State Court INDIANAPOLIS, Dec. bonds, totalling including interest, which William Abbott claimed to have in the Citizens Trust company Terre Haute when closed March 1928, do not stitute preferred claim against bank's receiver, was ruled today the Supreme court. The decision reversed the ruling the Knox Superior court, where the case was venued from Sullivan circuit court. Ben Crowder appealed the lower decision contentions that the left with officers of the bank for safekeeping, had never come into his possession. Evidence showed that the bonds had been placed with bank officials, the Supreme court ruled that they were either officer employe of the Trust company, or that the funds arising from their sale had been dissipated and that part came into the hands of the receiver, therefore, court ruled, claim was preferred. lower court decision ruling Abbott's claims deposit in the bank including the bonds justifiable claim, affirmed by the Supreme Court.