
    [No. 7216.]
    Vallero v. Camilla et al.
    
      Injunction — Dissolution—Dismissing Bill — Though a temporary injunction appears to have been improperly awarded, it is error to dismiss the bill on mere motion to dissolve, even though no cause of action is stated. The plaintiff is entitled to go to final hearing, and to amend his hill if so advised.
    
      Error to Denver District Court. — <Hon. George W. AggEn, Judge.
    Mr. N. Q. Tanquary and Mr. Charles Roach, for plaintiff in error.
    Mr. Chase Withrow and Mr. William E. Withrow, for defendant in error.
    Plaintiff in error brought suit against defendant in error the sole purpose of which was to enjoin the latter from selling, under an execution on a judgment obtained against her husband, real estate which she claims belonged .to her. On filing the complaint a temporary injunction was issued. After the issues were made up, the defendants filed a motion to dissolve the temporary writ. The record recites, in substance, that the cause was heard upon motion to- dissolve the- temporary injunction granted, and the court having heard the evidence introduced by the respective parties, and now being sufficiently advised in the premises, orders that the temporary writ be dissolved and the bill dismissed.
   Mr. Justice Gabbert

delivered the opinion of the court:

The hearing was solely upon a motion to dissolve the temporary injunction. For this reason, it was error to- dismiss the bill, although the showing made justified the dissolution of the temporary writ, as plaintiff still had -the right to a trial of the cause upon its merits, and to such relief as the case then made warranted. — Spar Con. M. Co. v. Casserleigh, 34 Colo. 454.

On behalf of defendants in error, it is asserted that the complaint does not state a cause of action. Conceding, but not deciding, that this is correct, the defect of the complaint in this respect may have justified the dissolution of the temporary writ, but plaintiff should have been afforded an opportunity to amend, if so advised. She was deprived of this by the judgment of dismissal.

The judgment of the district court, dismissing the action, is set aside, and the case remanded with directions to reinstate on the docket, and for such further proceedings as will*1 be in harmony with this opinion.

Reversed in part and Remanded.

Mr. Justice Musser and Mr. Justice Hill concur.  