Close Menu
Fund Focus News
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • How advisors can reframe the mutual fund vs. ETF debate
    • S&P 500 vs Nasdaq 100: Which global index fund is right for Indian investors seeking international market exposure?
    • ETFs Are Net Sellers of Coca-Cola (KO) on Oct. 23
    • Oracle Bonds Are Sliding as AI Debt Worries Grow. At 62, She Discovers the “Safe” Side of Her 401(k) Can Lose Money Too
    • Bitcoin ETFs Own Just 8.5% of BTC as IBIT Ends a Two-Day Outflow Run: Can BTC USD Hold $79,200?
    • Already investing in Reliance shares or mutual funds? Do you need additional Jio IPO exposure?
    • SEC Delays GraniteShares Bitcoin, XRP ETFs Ahead US Midterms
    • Is ClearBridge Aggressive Growth A (SHRAX) a Strong Mutual Fund Pick Right Now?
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Fund Focus News
    • Home
    • Bonds
    • ETFs
    • Funds
    • Investments
    • Mutual Funds
    • Property Investments
    • SIP
    Fund Focus News
    Home»Bonds»Error in bail bonds case says SD Supreme Court
    Bonds

    Error in bail bonds case says SD Supreme Court

    July 25, 2024


    Supreme Court of SD symbol on glass door in Pierre

    Supreme Court of SD symbol on glass door in Pierre

    PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) — A circuit judge erred when she ordered the forfeiture of bail bonds posted for two criminal defendants in Lincoln County, according to the South Dakota Supreme Court.

    In a decision publicly released on Thursday, the state’s high court said Dakota Bail Bonds shouldn’t have been penalized by Circuit Judge Rachel Rasmussen.


    The judge found that defendants Mark Wendland and Christopher Carr had violated conditions of their release without good cause, a violation of state law that allowed for the forfeiture of their bonds. A related state law allowed for setting aside the forfeiture, but the judge directed that their bonds be forfeited.

    Justice Scott Myren wrote the Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion. He said a bail bond is “widely understood” that it’s only to guarantee a defendant’s appearance in court. Wendland and Carr did appear in court.

    The Supreme Court ordered that the judge’s forfeiture decisions be reversed.

    “DBB’s surety agreement was a contract with the court to pay the specified dollar amount should the defendants fail to appear,” Justice Myren wrote. “Although the defendants violated other conditions of their release, neither of the defendants failed to appear in court. Instead, the defendants’ violations were all related to conditions of release that were not guaranteed by DBB’s surety.”

    He continued, “In the absence of a failure to appear, there was no violation of the sole condition DBB guaranteed. Therefore, under SDCL 23A-43-22, the circuit court should have directed that the forfeiture of DBB’s appearance bond be set aside. Consequently, the circuit court erred when it instead entered a judgment of default against DBB.”



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email

    Related Posts

    Oracle Bonds Are Sliding as AI Debt Worries Grow. At 62, She Discovers the “Safe” Side of Her 401(k) Can Lose Money Too

    October 27, 2026

    Daily: The case for bonds beyond peak yields

    October 26, 2026

    Filings Show Two Franklin Templeton Funds Hold CFAF 2 Billion in Cameroon Bonds

    October 25, 2026
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    ETFs Are Net Sellers of Coca-Cola (KO) on Oct. 23

    October 27, 2026

    Oracle Bonds Are Sliding as AI Debt Worries Grow. At 62, She Discovers the “Safe” Side of Her 401(k) Can Lose Money Too

    October 27, 2026

    How advisors can reframe the mutual fund vs. ETF debate

    October 27, 2026

    Sanlam Investments drives private credit footprint in mid‑market sector

    October 26, 2026
    Don't Miss
    Mutual Funds

    How advisors can reframe the mutual fund vs. ETF debate

    October 27, 2026

    Open this photo in gallery:The problems investors typically associate with mutual funds have less to…

    S&P 500 vs Nasdaq 100: Which global index fund is right for Indian investors seeking international market exposure?

    October 27, 2026

    ETFs Are Net Sellers of Coca-Cola (KO) on Oct. 23

    October 27, 2026

    Oracle Bonds Are Sliding as AI Debt Worries Grow. At 62, She Discovers the “Safe” Side of Her 401(k) Can Lose Money Too

    October 27, 2026
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Instagram
    • YouTube
    • Vimeo
    EDITOR'S PICK

    The Rise of Crypto ETFs: How to Invest in Digital Currency Without Buying Coins

    July 28, 2024

    Spot Bitcoin ETFs See Record 10-Day Outflow Streak, Analyst Calls It ‘Contrarian Indicator’

    May 30, 2026

    How mutual fund investments can help in saving for a property down payment

    August 12, 2025
    Our Picks

    How advisors can reframe the mutual fund vs. ETF debate

    October 27, 2026

    S&P 500 vs Nasdaq 100: Which global index fund is right for Indian investors seeking international market exposure?

    October 27, 2026

    ETFs Are Net Sellers of Coca-Cola (KO) on Oct. 23

    October 27, 2026
    Most Popular

    🔥Juve target Chukwuemeka, Inter raise funds, Elmas bid in play 🤑

    August 20, 2025

    💵 Libra responds after Flamengo takes legal action and ‘freezes’ funds

    September 26, 2025

    🇮🇸 CPP Investments and Equinix complete atNorth acquisition to support growth of leading Nordic data center platform

    September 1, 2026
    © 2026 Fund Focus News
    • Get In Touch
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.