Estate of Hoskins, 501 S.W.3d 295 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2016, no pet.).




Litigation over the testator’s estate had been ongoing for thirty years. In an attempt to resolve some of the issues, the probate court appointed a receiver with the limited duty of creating a report on the status of the assets in the testator’s estate. The appellate court agreed that under the facts of the case, the appointment of a receiver was appropriate.


The court explained that the appointment of a receiver is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. After conducting a detailed review of prior litigation and the current status of this protracted litigation, the court found that there was sufficient evidence to support the appointment of a receiver. The court acknowledged that receivership may be a severe remedy but that in this case, the receiver’s duty was limited to preparing a report on estate assets. The trustees and administrator retained the power and responsibility to take action after reviewing the receiver’s report. The court explained that “[r]ather than the harsh control of a true receivership, the probate court’s order resembles another remedy: the appointment of an auditor.” Hoskins at 309.


Moral:  Trust Code § 114.008(a)(5) authorizes the court to appoint a receiver if the facts so justify. An appellate court will not set aside the appointment unless the judge abused his or her discretion.