Receivership's are confined to the territorial boundaries of the court appointing the receiver.
While this particular Q&A was from California it applies in both Texas and Arkansas too.
Quote:If you are state court receiver, your authority over the business activity and property of the entity in receivership is confined to the territorial boundaries of the court appointing you. Therefore, if you were appointed in California by a state court, your powers are limited to the confines of California. You have no right to take possession of assets outside of California or to operate a business outside of California. This was decided long ago by the United States Supreme Court in Booth v. Clark, 17 How. 322, 328 (1854). That decision has been adopted by the courts in California and elsewhere. See Ward v. Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co., 135 Cal. 235, 237 (1901); Melvin v. Carl, 118 Cal.App. 249, 251 (1931) (“a receiver appointed by a court of a sister state has no authority over California property.”); First Nat. Bank v. Robinson, 107 F.2d 50, 54 (10th Cir. 1939) (“The power of an equity receiver is coextensive only with that of the territorial jurisdiction of the court appointing him. Such a receiver has no extra territorial jurisdiction or power of official action.”).
Excerpt taken from: www.ecjlaw.com/can-receiver-take-state-assets-california-appointment-order/
Not that it applies in this case since the receiver was appointed by a Texas Court, but to note that Texas also upholds this perspective:
Texas Statutes (Title 3, Ch 64. Receivership)
Quote:Sec. 64.003. FOREIGN APPOINTMENT. A court outside this state may not appoint a receiver for:
(1) a person who resides in this state and for whom appointment of a receiver has been applied for in this state; or
(2) property located in this state.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
