People v. Seneca Insurance

Bad Law
117 Cal. Rptr. 3d 217·189 Cal. App. 4th 1075·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1891
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 28, 2010G043026California2,688 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikola, J.

In this bail forfeiture action, defendant Seneca Insurance Company (Seneca) appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment and concomitant denial of Seneca’s motion to vacate forfeiture and exonerate bail or, alternatively, toll the time available for exoneration of bail. We affirm.

FACTS

Seneca, through its bail agent, posted a bail bond in the amount of $100,000 to secure the release of criminal defendant Dong Suk Kim on March 20, 2008. Kim failed to appear for his arraignment on September 9, 2008, and the court ordered bail forfeited in open court. Notice of forfeiture of bail bond was mailed to Seneca and the bail agent on September 10, 2008. The notice indicated: “Pursuant to Penal Code [section] 1305, the forfeiture will become final 186 days from the date of mailing of this notice unless, before that date, you obtain a court order setting aside such forfeiture, or the statute is tolled.”

An April 2, 2009 minute order stated in relevant part: “Motion by Seneca ... to extend time (for forfeiture) on bond pursuant to . . . Section 1305.4 was read and considered . . . .” “Motion granted.” “Court orders 180 days bail bond forfeiture period extended to 10/02/2009…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.