
    Wm. B. Conner v. Commissioners of Rice County.
    Attachment; Miidence to Sustain; Question of Fact. Upon a motion to dissolve an attachment, the question whether the attachment should be sustained, or dissolved, is to be determined from the facts established by the testimony; and where there is not sufficient testimony to sustain it, the attachment should be dissolved.
    
      Error from Rice District Court.
    
    Action by the Board of County Commissioners, upon the official bond of Blackman E. Lawrence, late county treasurer, to recover twenty thousand dollars of the moneys of Rice county, alleged to have been taken and embezzled by Lawrence. Conner and six others, sureties on the official bond, were joined as co-defendants. An order of attachment was sued out, and levied upon the property of Conner. A motion-made by Conner to dissolve the order of attachment was overruled, by the judge of the district court, at chambers, on the 27th of January 1877, and Conner appeals, and brings the case here.
    
      W. J. Fuller, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Ansel B. Clark, for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam:

Error is alleged in sustaining an order of attachment. The question is one of fact, and the testimony wholly by affidavit. It is enough to say upon this question of fact, that we think the court erred, and that there was not evidence sufficient to sustain the attachment.

The judgment will be reversed, and the case remanded with instructions to vacate and dissolve the attachment.

All the Justices concurring.  