legal news


Register | Forgot Password

County of Los Angeles v. Financial Casualty & Surety

County of Los Angeles v. Financial Casualty & Surety
06:07:2011

County of Los Angeles v


County of Los Angeles v. Financial Casualty & Surety


Filed 6/2/11 County of Los Angeles v. Financial Casualty & Surety CA2/2




NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

FINANCIAL CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY,

Defendant and Appellant.

B223913

(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. 0SJ1203)




APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Terry A. Bork, Judge. Affirmed.

Nunez & Bernstein and E. Alan Nunez for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of the County Counsel, Ralph H. Rosato, Assistant County Counsel and Joanne Nielsen, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent.



Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc. (appellant) appeals from an order denying its motion to vacate forfeiture, reinstate bond, and exonerate bond pursuant to Penal Code section 1305, subdivisions (c)(3) and (f).[1] Appellant argues that it is entitled to exoneration of the bond as a matter of equity, due to a miscommunication between the clerk of the court and the bail agent. We find that, on the record before us, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to set aside the forfeiture. Therefore we affirm.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
On January 29, 2009, Twin Towers Bail Bonds (Twin Towers), bail agent for appellant, posted bail bond No. FCS25-372290 for the release of defendant David Oliver (Oliver) from custody. This bond was applied in Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA044715 (the current action). The defendant had also been charged in another case, No. MA044967 (the second action), in the same court. Oliver appeared in court three times on the current action, but on April 30, 2009, he failed to appear and bail was forfeited. The notice of forfeiture was mailed to appellant and its agent.
On July 1, 2009, a motion to vacate the forfeiture of the bond and exonerate bail was filed in the second action. The motion was granted and the bond in the second action was exonerated on July 22, 2009.
Blain Carbo (Carbo), the bail agent in the current action, learned in August 2009, that Oliver had been arrested in Idaho. He notified fellow agent Robert Herman (Herman), who said he would check on the status of the bond. Herman called the clerk and inquired about the status of the bond in â€




Description Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc. (appellant) appeals from an order denying its motion to vacate forfeiture, reinstate bond, and exonerate bond pursuant to Penal Code section 1305, subdivisions (c)(3) and (f).[1] Appellant argues that it is entitled to exoneration of the bond as a matter of equity, due to a miscommunication between the clerk of the court and the bail agent. We find that, on the record before us, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to set aside the forfeiture. Therefore we affirm.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2026 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2026 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale