PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Merco Group at Akoya, the corporate judgment debtor in proceedings supplementary involving an unsatisfied nearly decade-old final judgment, appeals from an order appointing a post-judgment receiver under section 56.10, Florida Statutes (2025), at the request of appellee, General Computer Services, Inc., the judgment creditor. Casting aside the fact that there is no transcript of the pivotal hearing, the cases cited in furtherance of relief are inapposite because the plain language of section 56.10 of the Florida Statutes plainly authorizes the trial court to appoint a receiver for the corporate judgment debtor for the purpose of collecting the unsatisfied judgment. See § 56.10, Fla. Stat. (“If an execution cannot be satisfied in whole or in part for lack of property of the corporate judgment debtor subject to levy and sale . . . the circuit court in chancery . . . may appoint a receiver for the corporate judgment debtor.”); see also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”). We decline the invitation to engraft further language onto the statute and affirm the order under review. ^[1] See Fla. Dep’t of Revenue v. Fla. Mun. Power Agency, 789 So. 2d 320, 324 (Fla. 2001) (“Under fundamental principles of separation of powers, courts cannot judicially alter the wording of statutes where the Legislature clearly has not done so.”).

Affirmed.