Cnty. of L. A. v. Allegheny Cas. Co.
13 Cal. App. 5th 580
| Cal. Ct. App. 5th | 2017Background
- Allegheny Casualty (through Nelly's Bail Bonds) posted three bail bonds for defendants who failed to appear; notices of forfeiture mailed Oct. 14, 2014, starting a 185-day appearance period under Penal Code §1305.\
- Allegheny moved on Apr. 14, 2015 to extend the appearance periods; the trial court granted an extension on Apr. 23, 2015, extending the period 174 days to Oct. 14, 2015 (365 days from notice).\
- Allegheny filed a second extension motion calendared for Nov. 6, 2015, seeking a few additional days; the People opposed, arguing no time remained.\
- On Nov. 6, 2015 the trial court denied the second motion as the appearance period had expired; Allegheny appealed and summary judgment notices were mailed Nov. 23, 2015.\
- The Court of Appeal applied the California Supreme Court's decision in People v. Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc., holding the maximum extension is 180 days from the first extension order and that subsequent motions cannot push that outer limit further.\
- Court affirmed: because more than 180 days had passed from the Apr. 23, 2015 extension order when the second motion was heard, the trial court lacked authority to grant further extension.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a surety may obtain additional time to extend an appearance period beyond 180 days measured from the first extension order by using the §1305(j) tolling/hearing window for subsequent extension motions | Allegheny: §1305(j) tolling allows a timely-filed motion to be heard within 30 days after the 180-day period, so a later heard second motion can effectively extend beyond 180 days from the first extension order | People: Total allowable extension is limited to 180 days from the first extension order; once that period has passed the court lacks authority to extend further | Court: Follows Financial Casualty — the maximum extension is 180 days from the first extension order; subdivision (j) does not allow extending past that outer limit, so the trial court properly denied Allegheny’s second motion |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc., 2 Cal.5th 35 (California Supreme Court) (section 1305.4 extension runs up to 180 days from the first extension order; subsequent motions cannot extend beyond that limit)
- People v. American Contractors Indemnity Co., 33 Cal.4th 653 (California Supreme Court) (general principle: surety guarantees defendant appearance; bond forfeiture consequences)
- People v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 242 Cal.App.4th 991 (Cal. Ct. App.) (extension measured from court's extension order; summary judgment premature while motion pending)
- County of Los Angeles v. Williamsburg Nat. Ins. Co., 235 Cal.App.4th 944 (Cal. Ct. App.) (directed full hearing on second §1305.4 motion and noted maximum extension tied to remaining days of 180-day cap)
- People v. Accredited Surety & Casualty Co., Inc., 137 Cal.App.4th 1349 (Cal. Ct. App.) (trial court abused discretion in denying §1305.4 motion where good cause shown; arrest within 180 days supported vacatur of summary judgment)