While a trial court has broad discretion to appoint a receiver for property or a business owned by a judgment debtor, as a means of enforcing a judgment (CCP 708.620), a receiver is a harsh, expensive remedy that should be employed only based on evidence that the judgment debtors have obfuscated or frustrated the creditor’s collection efforts and that less intrusive collection methods were inadequate or ineffective. Here, no such evidence was submitted in support of the motion to appoint the receiver. Accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion in appointing the receiver.