Legal Opinion

State v. Nelson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided September 29, 2009No. A08-2064Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge.

Appellant Minnesota Surety & Trust Company challenges the imposition of a $2,500 penalty for failure to comply with district court rules, arguing that the district court erred in concluding that rule 702(f) requires personal service on the principal of the bond and abused its discretion by penalizing appellant one-half of the amount of the bond. Because rule 702(f) does not require that the petition and affidavit filed in support of a motion for reinstatement be personally served on the principal of a bail bond, we reverse and remand.

FACTS

After defendant Dane E.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re ShetskySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  2. State v. StorkampSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  3. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
  4. State v. VangCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API