Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 32.010 (2026)

Cases in which receiver may be appointed

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 32.010  Cases in which receiver may be appointed.  A receiver may be appointed by the court in which an action is pending, or by the judge thereof:

      1.  In an action by a vendor to vacate a fraudulent purchase of property, or by a creditor to subject any property or fund to the creditor’s claim, or between partners or others jointly owning or interested in any property or fund, on application of the plaintiff, or of any party whose right to or interest in the property or fund, or the proceeds thereof, is probable, and where it is shown that the property or fund is in danger of being lost, removed or materially injured.

      2.  In an action by a mortgagee for the foreclosure of the mortgage and sale of the mortgaged property, where it appears that the mortgaged property is in danger of being lost, removed or materially injured, or that the condition of the mortgage has not been performed, and that the property is probably insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt.

      3.  In an action to have a residential multifamily rental property declared to be a substandard property that is brought pursuant to NRS 244.36905 or 268.4284 to manage the repair or rehabilitation of the substandard property.

      4.  After judgment, to carry the judgment into effect.

      5.  After judgment, to dispose of the property according to the judgment, or to preserve it during the pendency of an appeal, or in proceedings in aid of execution, when an execution has been returned unsatisfied, or when the judgment debtor refuses to apply the judgment debtor’s property in satisfaction of the judgment.

      6.  In the cases when a corporation has been dissolved, or is insolvent, or in imminent danger of insolvency, or has forfeited its corporate rights.

      7.  In all other cases where receivers have heretofore been appointed by the usages of the courts of equity.

      [1911 CPA § 251; RL § 5193; NCL § 8749]—(NRS A 2025, 1463)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1963–2025 · leading case: Charmicor, Inc. v. Bradshaw Fin. Co., 550 P.2d 413 (Nev. 1976).
Charmicor, Inc. v. Bradshaw Fin. Co., 550 P.2d 413 (Nev. 1976). “) At the time appellant moved for the appointment of a receiver, all legal interest of appellant in the property had been terminated by the trustee’s sale. The only interest which remained vested in the appellant was a very contingent equitable interest which hinged on the…”
Tousa Homes, Inc. v. Phillips, 363 F. Supp. 2d 1274 (D. Nev. 2005). · cites it 5× “In its Motion to Dismiss, PlaintiffiCounterdefendant asserts that Defendants/Counterclaim-ants have failed to meet the requirements of NRS 32.010 and that there are adequate remedies at law, specifically: that Defendants/Counterclaimants have failed to allege that…”
Kraemer v. Kraemer, 382 P.2d 394 (Nev. 1963). “There can be no question about the court’s power to appoint a receiver under such circumstances, NRS 32.010(6); 95 A.L.R. 902 ; nor was the security requirement unreasonable.”
N5Hyg, Llc v. Iglesias (Nev. 2022). · cites it 8× “Second, appellant in that case sought a receiver under NRS 32.010 as a means to facilitate the final relief sought, i.”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Assoc. Vs. Palmilla Dev. Co., 2015 NV 9 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 6× “But the transaction that we presently consider was orchestrated pursuant to the method of judicial foreclosure sanctioned by NRS 32.010, not NRS 107.080. When a sale is conducted pursuant to NRS 107.”
Benford, Iii Vs. Jones-Benford (Nev. 2019). · cites it 2× “" NRS 32.010(1); see also NRS 32.010(6) (a court may appoint a receiver "[i]n all other cases where receivers have heretofore been appointed by the usages of the courts of equity"); NRS 125.”
Surefunding, Llc v. Hatton (Nev. 2022). · cites it 2× “Because respondents do not have standing to bring their substantive tort law claim, they are therefore barred from seeking the appointment of a receiver; NRS 32.010 only permits a district court to appoint a receiver where "an action is pending.”
Stapleton v. Balding (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “Applicable law 9 Plaintiffs offer several sources of authority in support of their motion: (1) NRS 32.010; 10 (2) 28 U.S.C. § 3103 ; and (3) Local Rule 66-1 and Rule 66 of the Federal Rules of Civil 11 Procedure.”
Waid v. York Holding, Ltd. (D. Nev. 2025). · cites it 2× “pursuant to NRS 32.010 13 and NRS 32.260 as of December 19, 2024.”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Assoc. Vs. Palmilla Dev. Co., 2015 NV 9 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 3× “But the transaction that we presently consider was orchestrated pursuant to the method of judicial foreclosure sanctioned by NRS 32.010, not NRS 107.080. When a sale is conducted pursuant to NRS 107.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 32.010(1) — 3 cases
N5Hyg, Llc v. Iglesias (Nev. 2022). “Second, appellant in that case sought a receiver under NRS 32.010 as a means to facilitate the final relief sought, i.”
Benford, Iii Vs. Jones-Benford (Nev. 2019). “" NRS 32.010(1); see also NRS 32.010(6) (a court may appoint a receiver "[i]n all other cases where receivers have heretofore been appointed by the usages of the courts of equity"); NRS 125.”
Waid v. York Holding, Ltd. (D. Nev. 2025). “pursuant to NRS 32.010 13 and NRS 32.260 as of December 19, 2024.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 32.010(2) — 2 cases
U.S. Bank Nat'l Assoc. Vs. Palmilla Dev. Co., 2015 NV 9 (Nev. 2015). “But the transaction that we presently consider was orchestrated pursuant to the method of judicial foreclosure sanctioned by NRS 32.010, not NRS 107.080. When a sale is conducted pursuant to NRS 107.”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Assoc. Vs. Palmilla Dev. Co., 2015 NV 9 (Nev. 2015). “But the transaction that we presently consider was orchestrated pursuant to the method of judicial foreclosure sanctioned by NRS 32.010, not NRS 107.080. When a sale is conducted pursuant to NRS 107.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 32.010(6) — 2 cases
Kraemer v. Kraemer, 382 P.2d 394 (Nev. 1963). “There can be no question about the court’s power to appoint a receiver under such circumstances, NRS 32.010(6); 95 A.L.R. 902 ; nor was the security requirement unreasonable.”
Benford, Iii Vs. Jones-Benford (Nev. 2019). “" NRS 32.010(1); see also NRS 32.010(6) (a court may appoint a receiver "[i]n all other cases where receivers have heretofore been appointed by the usages of the courts of equity"); NRS 125.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.