North Carolina Lawyers Weekly
The surety’s failure to timely include the proper paperwork with its motion to set aside a bond forfeiture caused prejudice to the school board only to the extent of additional time required of its attorney. When the trial court agreed to the surety’s proposal that it pay the board’s attorney’s fees, this was consistent with G.S. § 15A-544.5(d)(8).
We affirm the trial court’s order setting aside the bond forfeiture.
Section 15A-544.5(d)(8) provides, “If at the hearing [to set aside forfeiture] the court determines that the … documentation required to be attached … was not attached to the motion at the time the motion was filed, the court may order monetary sanctions against the surety filing the motion, unless the court also finds that the failure … to attach the required documentation was unintentional.”
Although the board did not request that the trial court impose sanctions, § 15A-544.5(d)(8) indicates the General Assembly’s intent to allow the trial court discretion to resolve such missteps, and that the surety’s errors did not as a matter of law preclude it from obtaining relief. The board’s position to not allow an amendment tends to contradict the intended policy of the bond system: the goal is the production of the defendant, not increased revenues for the county school fund.
State v. Isaacs (Lawyers Weekly No. 011-301-18, 12 pp.) (John Tyson, J.) Appealed from Watauga County Superior Court (Theodore McEntire, J.) Nathan Miller for the school board; Brian Elston for the surety. N.C. App.
