Wade v. Franklin, Recrs.

OPINION

By RICHARDS, J.

First, as to the receivers:’ It will be noticed that the negligence of which complaint is made was committed before the receivers wei'e appointed. The great weight of authority and the better reason sustain the doctrine that a receiver is not liable for tort committed by the corporation prior to his appointment. This conclusion naturally results because cf the fact that a receiver is only answerable for his own acts and the acts of his own employes. The authorities are collected in 23 R.C.Li., 85. In 53 C. J., 357, under “Receivers”, it is stated that “in an action of…