Column | Vail Law: Receivers, GALs and special masters

Go long!

No, no … despite the recent trading frenzy — and the Broncos’ recent speedy acquisition — that’s not the kind of receiver that deserves our focus.

So what, then, is a receiver in the world of law?  

Well, a “receiver” is — brace yourself — someone who receives. And you thought that law was complicated.

At law, to “receive” means to take into possession and control. A “receiver,” then, is a ministerial officer who acts as the temporary caretaker of property for the court. A receiver is a neutral “tweener” between the parties embroiled in a dispute who is appointed by the court to “receive” and preserve property, which is the subject of the litigation. S/he may also receive rents, issues and profits, and apply them at the direction of the court when it does not seem reasonable that either party should hold them. A receiver is one who acts to oversee, manage and preserve property or interests when it seems likely that the contestants to the dispute are unlikely or unwilling to appropriately do so on their own.

Support Local Journalism

Donate

In bankruptcy, a receiver is one who is empowered to take charge of the assets of an insolvent person or business and preserve them for sale and distribution to creditors.

What, then, of a GAL?

A GAL, while one may be, is, most definitely, not a reference to a woman or a girl. Instead, at law, a GAL refers to a Guardian ad Litem. Okay, but that means … ?

A “guardian” is one who protects or looks out for another. “Ad litem” means “for purposes of the suit,” in this case, a lawsuit rather than the kind of suit you wear. As such, together, a GAL is one who looks out for the interest of another in a legal matter. More specifically, a GAL is one appointed by a court to protect the interests of a minor or incompetent person.

At law, an “incompetent” person is one, owing to his or her tender age, or mental or emotional deficiency unable to competently manage his or her affairs. The word is not meant to be pejorative; it is, rather, simply a term-of-art description of an aspect of one’s legal capacity.

Being incompetent can be the basis for appointment of a guardian or conservator who is a person appointed by the court to take care of someone’s finances when he or she cannot make these types of decisions because of an illness, injury or disability. A guardian, on the other hand, is a person appointed to make mostly non-monetary decisions for someone who cannot do so for themselves. A guardian ad litem looks out for, and is an advocate for, the interests of his/her ward.

Let’s now get to special masters.

While a special master may, indeed, be one who feeds his dog the finest pet cuisine, that is not the context in which we intend it here.

A “special master” is one appointed by a court to carry out some sort of action on its behalf. Simple as that. Theoretically — and now we’re getting into nits to pick — a “special master” is different than a “master.” Hey, this is why lawyers spend so much time in law school!

A “master’s” function is essentially investigative. A master does things like compile evidence to assist the court in taking some future action. A special master, on the other hand, carries out some direct action on the part of the court. That’s what makes one special.

Rather than investigating a particular matter as a master does, what a special master does is perform some discrete, particular — “special” — function on the court’s behalf. As such, activities carried out by special masters are as diverse as the actions taken by the courts themselves. Special masters aren’t necessarily as exotic as they may seem. A special master can, not infrequently, be as mundane as being appointed a facilitator in a child custody case. Yawn. But the term is broad enough to have to describe the person appointed by Congress to administer compensation for the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

A special master is one who helps the court with some “special” task.

So what do these three — receivers, GALs, and special masters — have in common?

All are neutrals and agents of the court who function as fiduciaries — in other words, not on their own behalf. None has a dog in the particular fight with which they are charged to assist. The first, holds property and manages. The second holds hands, acts on one’s behalf and thereby comforts. And the third? Well, the sky may be the limit. All help lubricate the wheels of justice in the hope and expectation of reducing friction and aiding in the efficient administration of the law.

Rohn K. Robbins is an attorney licensed before the Bars of Colorado and California who practices in the Vail Valley with the Law Firm of Caplan & Earnest, LLC. His practice areas include business and commercial transactions; real estate and development; family law, custody, and divorce; and civil litigation. Robbins may be reached at 970-926-4461 or Rrobbins@CELaw.com. His novels are available at fine booksellers; the latest, “Falling,” was published in November.