History
  • No items yet
midpage
Viers v. Perry
112 Minn. 348
Minn.
1910
Check Treatment
Per 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 N. W. 179; Stai v. Selden, 87 Minn. 271, 275, 92 N. W. 6; First State Bank v. Schatz, 104 Minn. 425, 116 N. W. 917.

Order affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Viers v. Perry
Court Name: Supreme Court of Minnesota
Date Published: Nov 4, 1910
Citation: 112 Minn. 348
Docket Number: Nos. 16,900—(75)
Court Abbreviation: Minn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.