Indiana Supreme Court Declines to Take Up Case in Haskins, Leaving Intact Two-Year Statute of Limitations for Deposit Account Claims
September 2, 2026
By: Brett J. Ashton and Libby Yin Goodknight
The Indiana Supreme Court has unanimously denied transfer in Haskins v. Financial Builders Federal Credit Union, No. 25A-PL-1810 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2026), leaving in place the Indiana Court of Appeals’ published decision holding that Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations for actions “upon a deposit account” applies broadly to claims concerning deposit accounts, including challenges to overdraft fees. The plaintiff in Haskins asked the Supreme Court to take up the case and vacate the Court of Appeals’ decision, but the Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s transfer petition on August 4, 2026.
In Haskins, the plaintiff challenged overdraft fees charged in 2022, more than two years before he filed suit in December 2024. The plaintiff argued that his claim was governed by the ten-year statute of limitations for written contracts under Indiana Code § 34-11-2-11, based on the theory that the overdraft fees arose from the “service” component of his account agreement rather than from a contract strictly for the payment of money. The trial court disagreed and granted the credit union’s motion to dismiss based on the two-year statute of limitations for claims “upon a deposit account” in Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9(c). The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling.
Why This Matters for Indiana Banks and Credit Unions
Financial institutions now have a precedential Indiana appellate court decision confirming that the two-year limitations period in Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9(c) applies to deposit account-related claims, including overdraft-fee challenges. The Court of Appeals’ opinion is particularly significant because it addresses and rejects a theory frequently advanced by plaintiffs in overdraft-fee litigation: that claims involving account fees arise from the "service" aspects of an account agreement and therefore should be governed by a longer contract statute of limitations.
The Court of Appeals’ published decision is the culmination of efforts in the Indiana General Assembly to reinforce the nature of the contractual relationship between a financial institution and its depositor. In 2024, the General Assembly amended Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9 to shorten the limitations period for deposit account actions from six years – which is the general statute of limitations for actions on written contracts for the payment of money – down to two years. Haskins is the first appellate opinion to interpret the current codification of Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9, and it resolves in favor of financial institutions the principal argument plaintiffs have advanced to escape the shorter limitations period.
Krieg DeVault’s Involvement
Krieg DeVault LLP served as counsel to the Indiana Bankers Association and the Indiana Credit Union League, which participated as amici curiae in support of the credit union in Haskins.
Krieg DeVault’s Financial Institutions and Financial Services Litigation attorneys are actively monitoring financial institution litigation risks impacting banks and credit unions and are available to provide guidance on how best to protect your institution against these risks.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general informational purposes only, and you are urged to consult with counsel concerning your situation and specific legal questions you may have.
Practices
Industries
September 2, 2026
By: Brett J. Ashton and Libby Yin Goodknight
The Indiana Supreme Court has unanimously denied transfer in Haskins v. Financial Builders Federal Credit Union, No. 25A-PL-1810 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2026), leaving in place the Indiana Court of Appeals’ published decision holding that Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations for actions “upon a deposit account” applies broadly to claims concerning deposit accounts, including challenges to overdraft fees. The plaintiff in Haskins asked the Supreme Court to take up the case and vacate the Court of Appeals’ decision, but the Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s transfer petition on August 4, 2026.
In Haskins, the plaintiff challenged overdraft fees charged in 2022, more than two years before he filed suit in December 2024. The plaintiff argued that his claim was governed by the ten-year statute of limitations for written contracts under Indiana Code § 34-11-2-11, based on the theory that the overdraft fees arose from the “service” component of his account agreement rather than from a contract strictly for the payment of money. The trial court disagreed and granted the credit union’s motion to dismiss based on the two-year statute of limitations for claims “upon a deposit account” in Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9(c). The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling.
Why This Matters for Indiana Banks and Credit Unions
Financial institutions now have a precedential Indiana appellate court decision confirming that the two-year limitations period in Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9(c) applies to deposit account-related claims, including overdraft-fee challenges. The Court of Appeals’ opinion is particularly significant because it addresses and rejects a theory frequently advanced by plaintiffs in overdraft-fee litigation: that claims involving account fees arise from the "service" aspects of an account agreement and therefore should be governed by a longer contract statute of limitations.
The Court of Appeals’ published decision is the culmination of efforts in the Indiana General Assembly to reinforce the nature of the contractual relationship between a financial institution and its depositor. In 2024, the General Assembly amended Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9 to shorten the limitations period for deposit account actions from six years – which is the general statute of limitations for actions on written contracts for the payment of money – down to two years. Haskins is the first appellate opinion to interpret the current codification of Indiana Code § 34-11-2-9, and it resolves in favor of financial institutions the principal argument plaintiffs have advanced to escape the shorter limitations period.
Krieg DeVault’s Involvement
Krieg DeVault LLP served as counsel to the Indiana Bankers Association and the Indiana Credit Union League, which participated as amici curiae in support of the credit union in Haskins.
Krieg DeVault’s Financial Institutions and Financial Services Litigation attorneys are actively monitoring financial institution litigation risks impacting banks and credit unions and are available to provide guidance on how best to protect your institution against these risks.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general informational purposes only, and you are urged to consult with counsel concerning your situation and specific legal questions you may have.