
    RABINOWITZ v. POWER et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First DepartmenL
    March 5, 1909.)
    Mortgages (§ 468)—Foreclosure—Receiver.
    Plaintiff in mortgage foreclosure is not entitled to a receiver, where he fails to show that the property is inadequate security.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Mortgages, CenL Dig. §§ 1374, 1375; Dec. Dig. § 468.*]
    Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
    Action by Joseph Rabinowitz against James Power and others. From an order denying a motion to vacate an order appointing a receiver pending mortgage foreclosure, defendants appeal. Reversed.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN, HOUGHTON, CLARKE, and SCOTT, JJ.
    Adolph Cohen, for appellants.
    J. Leon Brandmarker, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to flate, & Rep’r Inflexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, having failed to show that the property is inadequate security for the amount due upon the bond and mortgage, was not entitled to have a receiver of the property appointed.

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion to vacate the order appointing a receiver granted, with $10 costs, with leave, however, to the plaintiff to renew the application, in case the defendants should unreasonably defend the action.  