Tonopah Banking Corporation (Tonopah, NV)

Episode Information

Episode Type
Suspension → Closure
Start Date
November 1, 1932
Location
Tonopah, Nevada (38.067, -117.230)
Bank Type
state
Routing Number
94-0020

Metadata

Episode ID
Bank ID
City ID
320845985
Model
gpt-5-mini
Short Digest

Notes

Bank was part of the Wingfield group and closed under the 1932 Nevada banking moratorium; later placed in receivership.

Events (3)
1. November 1, 1932 Suspension
Cause
Government Action
Cause Details
Nevada state business and banking holiday (moratorium) proclaimed by Lieutenant Governor Griswold affecting Wingfield group banks including Tonopah.
Newspaper Excerpt
By proclamation, I have just declared a business and banking holiday to and including the twelfth day of November, 1932.
Source
newspapers
2. March 11, 1934 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
Leo F. Schmitt, state bank receiver, yesterday left for Tonopah, where he will take charge of the assets of the Tonopah Banking Corporation.
Source
newspapers
3. January 31, 1935 Other
Newspaper Excerpt
$54,000 dividend is ordered for Tonopah Bank; depositor dividends ... will be paid at once to depositors of the Tonopah Banking Corporation by Leo Schmitt, receiver.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (13)
1. November 1, 1932 Reno Gazette-Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

GROUP OF BANKS The Wingfield group of banks in Nevada, with combined deposits of about sixteen million dollars and capital of $1,975,000 include: Reno National Bank and Bank of Nevada Savings and Trust Company, with deposits of $7,600,000 and capital of $800,000; Riverside Bank of Reno, capital $50,000, deposits approximately $1,060,000; United Nevada Bank of Reno, capital $400,000, deposits approximately $1,800,000; Tonopah Banking Corporation, capital $50,000, deposits approximately $325,000; Virginia City Bank, capital $25,000, deposits approximately $200,000; Wells State Bank, capital $25,000, deposits approximately $85,000; Henderson Banking Company of Elko, capital $200,000, deposits approximately $1,650,000; Churchill County Bank of Fallon, capital $75,000, deposits approximately $750,000; Carson Valley Bank of Carson City, capital $125,000, deposits approximately $850,000; Bank of Sparks, capital $25,000, deposits approximately $730,000; Winnemucca First National Bank, capital $200,000, deposits approximately $2,000,000. LEGISLATIVE SESSION Reports were current this morning that the calling of a special session of the Nevada legislature will be discussed with Governor Balzar on his return to the state as a considerable part of the state's funds, as well as the funds of counties, school districts, municipalities and the university are on deposit in the Wingfield banks. The legislative session, however, if one is called would not be held until late this month and during the next twelve days the proposed reorganization of the Wingfield banks may be effected, it was pointed out. The terms of present members of the legislature, excepting hold-over senators expire on November 8 and if the legislature is called in special session its membership will consist of those elected next Tuesday and the hold-over senators. GRISWOLD'S STATEMENT Lieutenant Governor Griswold issued a statement in addition to the moratorium proclamation setting forth in detail his reasons for taking the action. The statement follows: "To the people of the state of Nevada: By proclamation, I have just declared a business and banking holiday to and including the twelfth day of November, 1932. My reason for so doing is the conviction that business, banks, bank depositors and the entire people of the state of Nevada will be best protected by this action. "While some of our banks are not to be considered as otherwise than sound in all particulars, those of our banking institutions which have particularly supported our agricultural interests are naturally most seriously affected by the collapse in prices of agricultural products, which occurred about three years ago. Only very slight recovery in such prices has been realized and in the meantime and before the price collapse, exceptionally adverse climatic conditions have further destroyed the ability of the livestock raisers and farmers to reduce their obligations to the banks. In fact, these banks, in the hope of carrying over to a period of better conditions, have been obliged to

2. February 10, 1934 The Los Angeles Times Los Angeles, CA

Article Text

Bank Receivers' Naming Upheld CARSON CITY The right District Judge Guild for Nevada State banks, which the defunct George Wingbanking group, upheld unanimous decision the Nevada Supreme Court today Institutions affected the Bank Nevada Savings and Trust pany, the United Bank and Riverside Bank, all Reno: Bank Sparks, the Carson Valley Carson City, the Virginia City Bank and the TonoBanking Corporation.

3. February 10, 1934 The Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake City, UT

Article Text

Bank Receiver Action Upheld CARSON CITY, Nev., Feb. 9 (JP)The right of District Judge Clark J. Guild to appoint receivers for seven Neveda state banks, all of which were members of the defunct George Wing. field banking group, was upheld in a unanimous decision of the Nevada supreme court today. Institutions affected by the ruling are the Bank of Nevada Savings and Trust company, the United Nevada bank and the Riverside bank, all of Reno; the Bank of Sparks, the Carson Valley bank at Carson City, the Virginia City bank and the Tonopah Banking corporation.

4. March 11, 1934 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

Leo F. Schmitt Goes To Tonopah Leo F. Schmitt, state bank receiver, yesterday left for Tonopah, where he will take charge of the assets of the Tonopah Banking Corporation. The books of the Tonopah bank will be moved to Carson City for administration. The Tonopah bank building will be rented for other purposes. Schmitt will maintain offices in Reno, Sparks and Carson City. His assistants will be Peter L. Nelson, Roy J. Frisch, E. R. Simms, Hybert Neal, William Powers, William Casinella and G. B. Spradling. Miss June Sullivan of Carson City has been appointed stenographer for the Carson office.

5. July 14, 1934 Reno Gazette-Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

PREFERENCE SUIT TONOPAH HEARD It will probably be month more before preference suits filed on behalf of Esmeralda officials county against the receiver of the Tonopah Banking Corporation are decided by theh lower court, it was indicated today. Hearing of the suits filed by Amy Roberson, treasurer. sheriff, and Adams Brown, district attorney, asking preference for public funds on deposit in the Tonopah bank, held this week before Judge Edwards of Ely. The be submitted on briefs thee request of attorneys for plaintiffs, giving the attorneys forty in which prepare the papers John represented Leo bank receiver, the ficials represented Adams Brown, H. Cooke and Gray Mashburn, attorney general. About 000 involved. Willys for door sedan, 25 miles per gallon. adv

6. July 15, 1934 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

Tonopah Bank Case to Be Offered in Briefs The case concerning preference suits of the Esmeralda county officials against the receiver of the Tonopah Banking Corporation will be presented on briefs and will probably not be decided for six weeks. Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Adams F. Brown, H. R. Cooke and Gray Mashburn, attorney general, made the request when the case was held before Judge Edwards of Ely, and the court granted the request, giving them 40 days in which to prepare the briefs. Leo F. Schmitt, bank receiver, is represented by John S. Sinai.

7. July 15, 1934 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

Tonopah Bank Case to Be Offered in Briefs The case concerning preference suits of the Esmeralda county officials against the receiver of the Tonopah Banking orporation will be presented on briefs and will probably not be decided for six weeks. Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Adams F. Brown, H. R. Cooke and Gray Mashburn, attorney general, made the request when the case was held before Judge Edwards of Ely, and the court granted the request, giving them 40 days in which to prepare the briefs. Leo F. Schmitt, bank receiver, is represented by John S. Sinai.

8. October 6, 1934 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

SALARY COSTS CUT; DEBTORS FACING SUITS Lax Borrowers Who Do Not Cooperate Hit by Administrator The small percentage of persons who are indebted to the seven closed state banks and who, in the opinion of Leo F. Schmitt, receiver for the institutions, are not making the proper effort to liquidate such indebtedness may, in the near future, find such indebtedness reduced to judgment with a levy to issue on any of their assets. This suggestion was contained in a letter written by Schmitt to Judge Clark J. Guild, and which accompanied his quarterly report of the seven banks, Riverside bank of Reno, United Nevada bank of Reno, Bank of Nevada Savings and Trust company, Reno; Bank of Sparks, Carson Valley bank, Virginia City bank and the Tonopah Banking corporation.

9. November 23, 1934 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

Tonopah Bank's Preference Suit In Judge's Hands Final decision in the preference claim suits filed against the Tonopah Banking corporation will be made by Judge H. W. Edwards, who has the case under advisement. The suits involve $38,875. which, Esmeralda county officials maintain, should be preferred claims. H. R. Cooke of Reno and Adams F. Brown, Esmeralda county district attorney, represent Sheriff W. B. Mercer and County Treasurer Amy Roberson, who deposited county funds with the old John S. Cook bank before it. merged with the larger corporation, District Attorney Brown also seeks & preference claim for delinquent taxes which he deposited in the Tonopah bank. Leo F. Schmitt, bank receiver, who says the deposits should not be given preference, is represented in the matter by Platt & Sinai.

10. January 27, 1935 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

RFC Loan to Reno National Is Called Depositors' Blow Had the Reconstruction Finance corporation not loaned money to the Reno National bank in 1932 depositors in at least four closed banks would have benefitted, Leo F. Schmitt, receiver of the bank, testified in the federal court last week. The testimony was taken in Schmitt's suit against the RFC for an accounting and judgment for $188,000. The suit was brought by Schmitt in behalf of five of the closed banks that hold split loans, the security for which was pledged the RFC for part of the $3,500,000 loan made to the bank. The receiver testified that subordination agreements executed by the officers of the banks were unlawful. He held that the banks received nothing in return for subordinating their notes in order to make it possible for the Reno National to borrow the money and, therefore the RFC has no legal right to hold the paper and deprive the other banks of their equity in it. In support of his theory he testified that the banks gained nothing from the RFC loans. He stated that as a result of the loans to the Reno National, the action of the Reno National in transferring bad paper to several of the other banks, and the transferring of cash from certain banks to the Reno National, there were net losses or gains between March and November, 1932, to the depositors of the several closed banks. These banks follow: Bank of Nevada Savings and Trust company, loss $1,044,767.30. Tonopah Banking corporation, loss $86,531.51. Carson Valley Bank, loss $134,142.58.

11. January 31, 1935 Reno Gazette-Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

$54,000 DIVIDEND IS ORDERED FOR TONOPAH BANK Depositor dividends amounting to $54,466.68 will be paid at once to depositors of the Tonopah Banking Corporation by Leo Schmitt, receiver of the Tonopah bank, according to an order issued by District Judge Guild at Carson today. The order calls for a dividend of ten per cent to be paid on the original deposit liability of $544,666.76. Cash on hand in the bank now, according to Schmitt, amounts to $65,344.82.

12. September 7, 1935 Reno Gazette-Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

COURT DENIES PREFERRED CLAIM Holding that a $2,500 deposit in the Tonopah Banking Corporation Bank had no preferred status the supreme court Thursday affirmed a decision rendered by Judge Thomas F. Moran, sitting for Judge Walsh of the fifth district, in a suit brought by Marie W. Burdick of Tonopah against Leo F. Schmitt, bank receiver. Mrs. Burdick filed a preference claim for the money, asserting that the bank credited the money to the joint account of herself and husband without authorization. The money was received by the bank a few days before the bank closed in November, 1932, through the sale of an investment certificate for Mrs. Burdick. The bank notified her, by letter, that the money had been received but her husband, Dr. R. H. Burdick, received the letter and because of an accident, failed to notify his wife until the Saturday before the bank closed, it was stated at the trial of the case. The bank receiver, represented by Platt & Sinai, contended that the bank cashier had followed the usual banking practice by depositing the money in the joint account of the couple, which had been maintained in the bank for twelve years. Mrs. Burdick asserted that the money was hers and not owned jointly by herself and husband. In the supreme court decision, written by Judge E. J. L. Taber, the court stated: "It is a general rule, well established, that one who selects a bank as his collecting agent is bound by any reasonable custom or usage of the bank, in the absence of special instructions or agreement, whether he knows of such custom or usage or not."

13. September 8, 1935 Nevada State Journal Reno, NV

Article Text

A previous decision rendered by Judge Thomas F. Moran that a $2,500 deposit in the Tonopah Banking corporation bank had no preferred status was upheld in a supreme court decision yesterday. Judge Moran made the ruling recently while sitting for Judge Walsh of the fifth judicial district. The decision was the outgrowth of a suit brought against Leo F. Schmitt, bank receiver, by Marie W. Burdick of Tonopah. Mrs. Burdick filed a preference claim for the money asserting that the bank credited the money to the joint account of herself and her husband without authorization. The money was received by the bank a few days before the bank closed.