People v. North River Insurance Co. CA1/5
Filed 3/18/21 P. v. North River Insurance Co. CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A157356 THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY, (San Mateo County Defendant and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. 19CIV00097)
BAD BOYS BAIL BONDS, Real Party in Interest and Appellant.
The North River Insurance Company (North River) and Bad Boys Bail Bonds (Bad Boys) appeal from a summary judgment entered on a bail bond and an order denying their motion to set aside the judgment. They contend the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the summary judgment because the defendant had a sufficient excuse for failing to appear. We will affirm.
1
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY North River, as surety, and Bad Boys, as bail agent, posted a bail bond in the amount of $45,000 guaranteeing the appearance of criminal defendant Matthew Lee Kennedy. On May 25, 2018, Kennedy failed to appear in court as required by law. The court (Judge Holt) declared the bond forfeited in open court. Notice of the forfeiture was mailed to appellants on June 4, 2018. During the 180-day appearance period ending on December 6, 2018, no motion was filed to vacate the forfeiture or exonerate bail (Pen. Code, § 1305) or to obtain an extension of the time to bring Kennedy into court (§ 1305.4).1 Summary judgment on the bond was signed by Judge Finigan on December 19, 2018. The judgment recites that Kennedy failed to appear on May 25, 2018 “without sufficient excuse” and the court had forfeited the bond. It orders that judgment be entered for $45,000 against North River and in favor of the People pursuant to section 1306. The judgment was filed on January 8, 2019, and the court clerk mailed notice of the entry of the judgment that same day. Meanwhile, on December 26, 2018—after the judgment was signed but before it was filed—the defendant appeared in court. His lawyer stated: “Your Honor, Mr. Kennedy has family in the courtroom, and they want the Court to be aware Mr. Kennedy has a developmental disability. He came to court on his last day, but was separated from the friend that brought him to the courthouse. [¶] His wife will support him to make sure he comes to court and will provide transportation and reminders.” No evidence was offered to substantiate defendant’s disability or his inability to appear at the May 2018
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)