238 Cal. App. 4th 1041
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- Defendant Mark McBride failed to appear on May 17, 2013; the trial court declared bail forfeited and clerk mailed a notice of forfeiture that same day.
- Certificate of mailing on the forfeiture notice showed execution date May 17, 2013; envelope postmarked May 29, 2013; surety received notice May 31, 2013.
- Penal Code gives the surety a 185-day appearance period from notice of forfeiture; summary judgment may be entered only after that period and must be entered within 90 days thereafter.
- Trial court entered summary judgment on November 18, 2013; certificate of mailing for that notice executed November 18, 2013; envelope postmarked November 20, 2013.
- Surety moved to set aside the summary judgment on December 19, 2013, arguing the judgment was premature (entered one day before the appearance period ended) and therefore voidable; trial court denied the motion as untimely.
- Court of Appeal reversed: summary judgment was entered one day prematurely, the surety’s motion to set aside was timely (filed before judgment became final), and the court no longer had authority to enter a new summary judgment so the bond was exonerated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did the 185-day appearance period begin to run? | County: use the certificate execution date (May 17) as mailing date. | ACIC: Code Civ. Proc. §1013a(4) and postmark show mailing May 29, so period began May 29. | Use certificate execution date absent a timely motion/finding under §1013a(4); period began May 17. |
| Was the November 18, 2013 summary judgment timely? | County: judgment was timely. | ACIC: judgment was premature—entered on 185th day rather than after it. | Judgment was entered one day prematurely (should have been no earlier than Nov. 19). |
| Was ACIC’s motion to set aside the premature judgment timely? | County relied on authority suggesting a 15-day rule for some motions. | ACIC: motion filed before judgment became final (within 60 days) so timely. | Motion was timely — must be brought before the judgment becomes final (60 days after clerk mails notice). |
| May the trial court now enter a new summary judgment? | County: implied the court could still act. | ACIC: the court’s premature judgment is voidable; once vacated, court’s 90-day window has passed. | Trial court no longer has authority to enter summary judgment; bond is exonerated. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. American Contractors Indemnity Co., 33 Cal.4th 653 (California 2004) (voidable premature bail summary judgment must be set aside before it becomes final)
- People v. Ranger Ins. Co., 77 Cal.App.4th 813 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) (bail forfeiture statutes strictly construed to protect sureties)
- People v. Accredited Surety & Cas. Co., 220 Cal.App.4th 1137 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (discussion of timeliness of motions to set aside bail forfeiture judgments)
- Christie v. City of El Centro, 135 Cal.App.4th 767 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (voidable judgments must be set aside before becoming final)
- People v. Frontier Pacific Ins. Co., 83 Cal.App.4th 1289 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) (statutory timing limits for entering and enforcing bail forfeiture judgments)