Grannis

County of Los Angeles v. Grannis

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 336·88 Cal. App. 391·263 P. 835
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 18, 1928Docket No. 5010.California340 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hahn, J.

This is an appeal by defendants in an action against them as sureties on a bail bond and from the order of court refusing a new trial. The case comes here upon the judgment-roll alone.

Three points are urged by appellant.

First. That the bail bond in question was void because approved by a court commissioner and not by a judge of the superior court.

* Second. That the sureties were relieved from their on the bond in question because the trial of the case in which the bond was given was continued several times without the knowledge or the consent of the sureties; and

Third. That the findings are “insufficient because of the generalness to sustain a judgment.”

There is no merit in any of the points urged. Section 259 of the Code of Civil Procedure specifically provides for the examination of sureties and the approval of bonds by a court commissioner. Moreover, the examination of sureties or formal approval of a bond is not a part of the contract entered into by the sureties. (3 Cal. Jur. 1059; Carpenter v. Furrey, 128 Cal. 666 [ 61 Pac. 369 ].) There is no provision in the statute that entitles the sureties on a bond to notice of a continuation of the case. No cases are cited…

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.