Viers v. Perry
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Yellow Medicine county, which was transferred to Marshall county, to recover $948.90 on a promissory note. Plaintiff caused certain of defendant’s property to be attached. Defendant moved to vacate the attachment and supported the motion with affidavits, and plaintiff opposed the motion with counter affidavits. The motion was heard and granted by Grindeland, J. From the order granting the motion, plaintiff appealed.
1Per curiam
This appeal presents the sole question whether the trial court erred by its order granting the defendant’s motion to dissolve the *349writ of attachment herein. The motion was made and opposed upon conflicting affidavits, which show no clear preponderance of proof opposed to the decision of the trial court. The case, then, falls within the rule that the determination of a question of fact, on the hearing of a motion on affidavits, will not be reversed, if there be evidence reasonably tending to support it. First Nat. Bank v. Randall, 38 Minn. 382, 37 N. W. 799; State v. Madigan, 66 Minn. 10, 68…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- First National Bank v. RandallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- State v. MadiganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- First State Bank v. SchatzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Stai v. SeldenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
3Cited by4 opinions
- Minneapolis Gaslight Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Clarke & Simmons, Inc. v. RuleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Hurni v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Stockhaus v. LindSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921