Trial Court’s Lack of Action Made Moot the Issues Raised on Appeal

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/failure-issue-summary-judgment-within-90-days-surety-barry and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3750 posts.

Bankers Insurance Company (the Surety) appealed from trial court orders denying its motion to vacate forfeiture and exonerate bail and denying its subsequent motion to toll time. Because the trial court failed to timely enter summary judgment and now lacks jurisdiction to enforce the forfeiture under Penal Code section 1306, subdivision (c), in any event, the court refused to reach the merits. In The People v. Bankers Insurance Co., A157633, Court Of Appeal Of The State Of California (June 10, 2021) was asked to deal with the refusal of the state to exonerate a bond when faced with evidence from the surety that the defendant was in custody and could not appear.Bankers Insurance Company (the Surety) appealed from trial court orders denying its motion to vacate forfeiture and exonerate bail and denying its subsequent motion to toll time. Because the trial court failed to timely enter summary judgment and now lacks jurisdiction to enforce the forfeiture under Penal Code section 1306, subdivision (c), in any event, the court refused to reach the merits. In The People v. Bankers Insurance Co., A157633, Court Of Appeal Of The State Of California (June 10, 2021) was asked to deal with the refusal of the state to exonerate a bond when faced with evidence from the surety that the defendant was in custody and could not appear.

ZALMA OPINION

The Court of Appeal cut through the chaff and found that since the trial court failed to comply with the statute by entering a summary judgment against the surety within 90 days it had no right to do so nor could it collect the bond. The Surety did what it could to exonerate the forfeiture only to have the trial court refuse and then slothfully failed to enter summary judgment within 90 days requiring the exoneration of the forfeiture. Statutes are written to be followed and failure to enter summary judgment defeated the state’s action and saved the surety $100,0o00.