Legal Opinion

State v. Kramer

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 2009No. 81071-1PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, J.

¶1 This case involves a trial court’s discretion to refuse to vacate a default judgment of forfeiture against a surety when the defendant has been returned to custody within the 60 days provided by RCW 10.19.105. This court has long held that bondsmen are entitled to exoneration of bonds whenever a defendant is returned to custody within 60 days. We find the trial court erred in refusing to vacate a default judgment of forfeiture against All City Bail Bonds. All City should have received the benefit of the equities provided for in RCW 10.19.105. We reverse the Court of Appeals.

*551FACTS

¶2 All…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. State v. JackschitzWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. State v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1912
  3. United States v. FeelyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Virginia · 1813
  4. State v. HeslinWashington Supreme Court · 1964
  5. State v. O'DAYWashington Supreme Court · 1950

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BartonWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State Of Washington v. Pacific Northwest Bail BondingCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
  3. State v. BartonWashington Supreme Court · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API