People v. Internat. Fidelity Ins. CA5

Filed 11/19/14 P. v. Internat. Fidelity Ins. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F067760 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F10901037) v.

INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE OPINION CO.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Alan M. Simpson, Judge. John M. Rorabaugh for Defendant and Appellant. Daniel C. Cederborg, County Counsel, and Evan A. Merat, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- Defendant and appellant, International Fidelity Insurance Company (International Fidelity), the surety on a bail bond, appeals the order denying its motion to set aside the

summary judgment on a forfeited bond. International Fidelity argues that the summary judgment on the bail forfeiture is void because it was entered while International Fidelity’s appeal from the order denying its motion to vacate the forfeiture was pending. According to International Fidelity, the pendency of the appeal from the order denying the motion to vacate the forfeiture deprived the trial court of jurisdiction to enter summary judgment on the forfeited bond. Under long-standing case authority, an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate the forfeiture of a bail bond does not stay the power of the trial court to enter summary judgment on that forfeited bond. Contrary to International Fidelity’s position, case law broadly applying Code of Civil Procedure section 916 in other situations has not changed this rule. Accordingly, the order denying the motion to set aside the summary judgment will be affirmed. BACKGROUND On March 1, 2010, International Fidelity posted a $400,000 bond for the release of the defendant from custody. When the defendant failed to appear in court on March 15, 2010, the trial court ordered bail forfeited. Through timely motions filed by International Fidelity, the forfeiture period was extended to March 16, 2011. On March 15, 2011, International Fidelity moved to vacate the forfeiture and exonerate bail. On June 9, 2011, the trial court denied International Fidelity’s motion and ordered that summary judgment be entered in respondent’s favor. International Fidelity filed a notice of appeal from this order on June 13, 2011. Summary judgment on the bond was entered on August 5, 2011. This court affirmed the trial court’s denial of International Fidelity’s motion to vacate the forfeiture and exonerate bail in a decision filed on January 16, 2013. Remittitur issued on March 18, 2013. On April 8, 2013, International Fidelity filed the underlying motion to set aside the summary judgment. International Fidelity argued that the trial court was without