Vause v. Woods

Citations

• 46 Miss. 120

Syllabus

<p>1. CHANCERY — receiver — when appointed. — To warrant the appointment of a receiver, the circumstances must show a manifest propriety and fitness to place the fund or property in the custody of the court. It can only he done at the instance of a party who has an acknowledged interest, or a strong-presumption of title, and where the property, or its rents and profits are in danger of being injured or lost. As against the legal title the interposition is with reluctance, and takes place only in case of fraud, clearly proved, and danger to the property.</p> <p>3. Case cited — same. — The case of Mays v. Rose, Freeman’s Ch. 718, cited and sanctioned, as to the chancellor’s summary of the grounds for the appointment of a receiver.</p> <p>3. Same — same — when appointed against mortgagee or executor.— A receiver will not he appointed at the instance of a mortgagee, except upon the ground that the property is insufficient to pay his debt, and, therefore, pending litigation, he should have the rents and income. Uor will a receiver he appointed against an executor, except in case of an abuse of his trust, or danger of insolvency.</p> <p>i. Same — same — where contest over title. — Where the contest is over the title, the defendant, if he has apparently and ostensibly the legal title, will not be deprived of possession unless upon avery strong case of risk of loss of the property and inability to respond, from insolvency, to the decree.</p> <p>5. Same — notice necessary. —The appoinment of a receiver, without the notice required by statute, is erroneous.</p>