• About AIA
    • About AIA
    • AIA’s Executive Team
    • Agent Testimonials
  • News
    • Bail Bond Blog
    • Recent Bail Articles
  • Bail Bond Resources
    • Become a Bail Agent
    • Bail Bond FAQs
    • Bail Research Library
    • State by State Bail Directory
    • Upcoming State Association Meetings and Events
  • Other Bonds
  • Contact

Delaware Case Laws

You are here: Home / Delaware Bail Resources / Delaware Case Laws

Delaware Case Laws

Click on the below to read Delaware Case Laws for the following years:
2012
2011
2003

Delaware Case Law 2012

In Raymond v. McGriff, 2012 WL 1641648 (D.Del. May 4, 2012) an inmate sued two bondsmen to recover funds the inmate’s wife allegedly paid the bondsmen.  The court dismissed the suit because, among other reasons, the bondsmen did not act under color of state law as required by 42 U.S.C. §1983.  The court stated, “Defendants are private individuals engaged in the bail bondsman trade. Quite simply, they are not “clothed with the authority of state law.”

American Funding Services v. State, 2012 WL 540927 (Del. February 21, 2012) affirmed the Superior Court decision reported at 2011 WL 3689250 (Del.Super. August 23, 2011).  The Court emphasized that the petitioner had not appealed the decision of the Justice of the Peace Court.  On a petition for certiorari, the Superior Court was limited to consideration of errors of law, jurisdiction, and whether there is an adequate record for review.  Here the Superior Court correctly dismissed the petition.  The defendant failed to appear, therefore forfeiture was required.  The Justice of the Peace court had jurisdiction over the defendant, and the record was adequate for review and showed no irregularity in the proceedings.

Delaware Case Law 2011

In American Funding Services v. State, Case No. S11A-04-006 (Del.Super. August 23, 2011) the defendant failed to appear and the bond was forfeited.  The Justice of the Peace Court (JPC) ordered that if the defendant was brought before the court within 30 days the court would consider a motion to set aside the forfeiture.  Neither the defendant nor the surety appeared within the 30 days, but law enforcement located the defendant in jail in Maryland over a year later and arrested him.  The surety sought review in the Superior Court of the JPC’s bail forfeiture.  The State made several procedural objections which the Court rejected, but on the merits the Court affirmed the JPC forfeiture order.  The surety represented that it was “the sole cause of presentation of the Defendant in Court” but the record showed otherwise.  The Court found that the surety had not shown illegal proceedings or an error of law and denied its request for relief.

Delaware Case Law 2003

In State of Delaware v. Jefferson, 2003 WL 22931392 (Del Common Pleas October 10, 2003) the defendant failed to appear and her bond was forfeited. A few days later she was brought before the court. The court denied a motion to vacate the forfeiture because no evidence was presented to show that the bondsman made any effort to locate the defendant and return her to the court.

Search

Recent Blog Posts

The Public Responds With an Emphatic “NO” to Cashless Bail
The Public Responds With an Emphatic “NO” to Cashless Bail
September 10,2025 - 2:08 pm

© Copyright 2005-2025 AIA Surety All Rights Reserved | 800.935.2245

  • About AIA
  • Bail Resources
  • Become an Agent
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Security
  • Accessibility
Skip to content
Open toolbar

Accessibility

  • Increase Text
  • Decrease Text
  • Grayscale
  • High Contrast
  • Negative Contrast
  • Light Background
  • Links Underline
  • Readable Font
  • Reset
  • Help