IBJNews

Developer's fraud trial enters second day

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Marion County prosecutors this morning began making their case that Christopher P. White knowingly wrote a bad check for $500,000 last year in a desperate attempt to save his Indianapolis-based development firm, Premier Properties USA Inc.

White, 52, is facing three felony charges including fraud on a financial institution and theft. He allegedly wrote the check to cover payroll as financial and legal troubles were mounting for the company. His jury trial started yesterday in Marion Superior Court.

The check, deposited to an account at The National Bank of Indianapolis, was drawn on an account at JP Morgan Chase that never had a balance of more than $1,000, the prosecutor's office said.

George Keely, an executive at The National Bank of Indianapolis, this morning testified that the bank quickly closed 12 accounts tied to White to limit the bank's exposure after it learned of the bad check.

But White promised the bank the money was coming, so it waited several weeks before it launched a lawsuit and consulted with the prosecutor's office in March 2008. Ultimately, the bank lost about $382,000.

Defense attorney Thomas Collignon said White anticipated receiving funds from a deal in Las Vegas and that he never intended to come up short in the account.

Premier built a reputation for taking on daring projects with little margin for error, including Metropolis mall in Plainfield, but when credit markets tightened, troubles quickly mounted. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in April 2008. A month later, a judge converted the case to Chapter 7 and ordered the company to be liquidated.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT