Adams v. Haskell & Woods

Citations

• 6 Cal. 475

Syllabus

<p>Receivers, or other custodians of money in the hands of a Court, who are receivers except in name, as they are hound to obey the orders of the Court in their relation to the fund, as well as regards its safe custody as its return, are correlatively entitled to the protection of the Court against loss for disbursements which were necessary and proper, and such as a reasonable and prudent man, acting as receiver, would have been justified in expending.</p> <p>It follows, that an order of Court directing a referee “ to ascertain and report the amount of disbursements and expenses made with, or under the direction and authority of the Court,” by a receiver or custodian of money in the hands of the Court, is too narrow to do him justice, and should be so enlarged as to allow for all reasonable and proper expenses incident to the receivership.</p> <p>And this, although the claim is for disbursements, etc., incurred by the custodian of the fund, under an appointment as assignee in a proceeding in insolvency, which was afterwards held to be void.</p>