Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co., Inc. v. Putnam County, Fla.
| Decision Date | 16 June 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-835,87-835 |
| Citation | 528 So.2d 430,13 Fla. L. Weekly 1424 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1424 ACCREDITED SURETY & CASUALTY COMPANY, INC., Appellant, v. PUTNAM COUNTY, FLORIDA, Appellee. |
Edward E. Hedstrom, Palatka, for appellant.
Ronald E. Clark, Palatka, for appellee.
Appellant, Accredited Surety and Casualty Company, Inc., was surety on the appearance bonds for two criminal defendants. When the defendants failed to appear in court at the proper time, the bonds were forfeited. The surety secured the surrender and arrest of one defendant on the same day he failed to appear; the other defendant was apprehended and surrendered six days after he failed to appear. When the surety applied for remission of the two forfeitures pursuant to section 903.28(2), Florida Statutes, the trial court ordered a remission of only 75% of the amount of the appearance bonds. Accredited Surety appeals.
Section 903.28(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1986), the applicable statute in this case, provides:
(2) If the defendant surrenders or is apprehended within 90 days after forfeiture, the court, on motion at a hearing upon notice having been given to the county attorney and state attorney as required in subsection (8) may direct remission of up to, but not more than, 100 percent of a forfeiture if the surety apprehended and surrendered the defendant or if the apprehension or surrender of the defendant was substantially procured or caused by the surety, or the surety has substantially attempted to procure or cause the apprehension or surrender of the defendant, and the delay has not thwarted the proper prosecution of the defendant. In addition, remission may be granted when the surety did not substantially participate or attempt to participate in the apprehension or surrender of the defendant when the costs of returning the defendant to the jurisdiction of the court have been deducted from the remission and when the delay has not thwarted the proper prosecution of the defendant.
(Emphasis added.) 1
As we read this statute, the movant (the surety) has the burden, after forfeiture, to show that it substantially procured or substantially attempted to procure the return of the defendant for trial and that any delay has not thwarted proper prosecution. Once the movant has established these two conditions precedent, then (and only then) does the trial court have discretion to remit some or all of the forfeited bond to the surety. Since any remission is a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
BOARD OF COM'RS v. Barber Bonding Agency
...by their provisions. Leon County v. Aloi-Williams Bonding Agency, 652 So.2d 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co. v. Putnam County, 528 So.2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Accredited Sur. and Cas. Co. v. State, 418 So.2d 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Courts say that such statutes should......
-
SURETY CONTIN. HERIT. INS. CO. v. ORANGE CTY.
...because the State was unwilling to initiate extradition proceedings. As this court explained in Accredited Surety & Casualty Co. v. Putnam County, Fla., 528 So.2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988): [T]he [surety] ... has the burden, after forfeiture, to show that it substantially procured or substant......
-
Clerk of the Circuit Court v. U.S. Specialty Ins. Co.
...citing Leon County v. Aloi-Williams Bonding Agency , 652 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) ; then citing Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co. v. Putnam County , 528 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) ; and then citing Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co. v. State , 418 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) )."Remission of f......
-
Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller of Collier Cnty. v. U.S. Specialty Ins. Co.
... ... CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER OF COLLIER COUNTY, Appellant, v. U.S. SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY ... of statutory interpretation. GTC, Inc. v. Edgar, 967 ... So.2d 781, 785 (Fla ... 1st DCA 1995); then citing ... Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co. v. Putnam County, 528 ... ...