Law Lessons from ELLIOT ROJAS VS. RIFKY RUBENSTEIN AND 208-210 PARKER CORPORATION, ET AL., App. Div., A-5755-10T2, October 18, 2012:
The “primary responsibility of a court-appointed receiver is to manage the assets of the property,” and this responsibility “arises from the receiver’s official duties.” J.L.B. Equities, Inc. v. Dumont, 310 N.J. Super. 366, 373-74 n.6 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 156 N.J. 406 (1998). Accordingly, when a receiver is appointed to manage property, the receiver acts “in [an] official capacity and [can] only be found liable in that capacity, not personally.” Id. at 374.
Rent receiverships are not an area commonly understood by the average person. The average juror may not even be familiar with a rent receiver at all, and therefore, to understand the duties and responsibilities a rent receiver undertakes would not be readily apparent. Instead, the level of care required by rent receivers, especially when the available funds are grossly insufficient, would need to be explained by an expert in order to provide a background for the jury. Therefore, an expert is required to advance a plaintiff’s claims against a rent receiver in his official capacity.
NOTE from Paul G. Kostro, Esq.: If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Divorce, Domestic Violence, Child Support or Other Legal Matters, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email.
NOTE: This Blog/Blawg, NJ Family Issues, is managed by Paul G. Kostro, Esq., an attorney/lawyer/mediator in Linden, Union County, New Jersey.