International Fidelity Insurance v. People

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

International Fidelity Insurance v. People

271 A.D.2d 446, 708 N.Y.S.2d 296, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3798

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 3, 2000·Published

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPL 540.30 for the remission of a forfeiture of bail, International Fidelity Insurance Company, as surety, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cutrona, J.), entered March 26, 1999, which denied its motion to remit the forfeiture of bail of its principal, Kato Jenkins, and to vacate the judgment entered thereon.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant did not move for remission of the forfeiture of bail until more than a year after the order directing the bail to be forfeited was entered. Thus, the appellant’s application for remission of the forfeited bail was properly denied as untimely pursuant to CPL 540.30 (2) (see, People v Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 37 NY2d 606; People v Cotto, 262 AD2d 138).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Krausman, J. P., H. Miller, Schmidt and Smith, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPL 540.30 for the remission of a forfeiture of bail, International Fidelity Insurance Company, as surety, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cutrona, J.), entered March 26, 1999, which denied its motion to remit the forfeiture of bail of its principal, Kato Jenkins, and to vacate the judgment entered thereon.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant did not move for remission of the forfeiture of bail until more than a year after the order directing the bail to be forfeited was entered. Thus, the appellant’s application for remission of the forfeited bail was properly denied as untimely pursuant to CPL 540.30 (2) (see, People v Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 37 NY2d 606; People v Cotto, 262 AD2d 138).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Krausman, J. P., H. Miller, Schmidt and Smith, JJ., concur.

International Fidelity Insurance v. People, 271 A.D.2d 446, 708 N.Y.S.2d 296, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

271 A.D.2d 446 (International Fidelity Insurance v. People) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related