County of Santa Barbara v. American Surety Co. CA2/6
Filed 1/27/22 County of Santa Barbara v. American Surety Co. CA2/6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SIX
COUNTY OF SANTA 2d Civil No. B309245 BARBARA, (Super. Ct. No. 20CV02315) (Santa Barbara County) Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY,
Defendant and Appellant.
American Surety Company (American Surety) appeals entry of summary judgment on the forfeiture of a bail bond. American Surety contends Emergency rule 9 of the “Judicial Council’s Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19” (Cal. Rules of Court, Appx., Emergency rule 9) tolled the time in which it could move to set aside the forfeiture under Penal Code section 1305,
subdivision (a)1, rendering judgment premature under these circumstances. Our colleagues in Division 1 of the Fourth Appellate District thoroughly discussed and resolved this issue in People v. Financial Casualty & Surety (Dec. 21, 2021, D078294) __ Cal.App.5th __ [2021 Cal.App. Lexis 1072].) As Justice Haller stated, “The plainly intended meaning of Emergency rule 9 is that statutes of limitation and repose for pleadings commencing civil causes of action—not deadlines for filing motions asserting defenses—are temporarily tolled.” (Id., at p. [11], italics added.) We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Santa Barbara County District Attorney charged Angel Campuzano with felony child molestation in 2017.2 Campuzano pleaded not guilty on all counts and the trial court set bail at $250,000. American Surety posted a bond for his release from custody. The trial court ordered the bond forfeited when Campuzano failed to appear at his felony settlement conference. The clerk mailed notice to his bail bondsman and American Surety in October of 2019. Neither moved to set aside the forfeiture within the statutory period to do so. (§ 1305.) Respondent County of Santa Barbara filed the civil forfeiture action from which this appeal arises. The trial court entered summary judgment against American Surety in July of 2020. (§ 1306.)
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)