
    GALLIARD vs. DUBOSE & CO.
    [ACTION ON OPEN ACCOUNT FOR GOODS SOLD AND DELIVERED.]
    1. Amendment on error, after judgment by default, of insufficient description of parties’ names in complaint. — After judgment by default, in an action by a partnership, tbe failure to state the individual names of the partners in the cqmplaint, when they are fully stated in the accompanying summons, is an error wirch, being amendable in the primary court, will be considered amended on error. — Code, § 2404.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Wilcox.
    Tried before the Hon. Nat. Cook.
    The record in this case shows, that the defendant, Edmund Gaillard, was summoned “to answer the complaint of Isaac C. Dubose and Emanuel Jones, merchants and co-partners, trading under the name and style of I. C. Dubose & Co.” The complaint was in the name of I. C. Dubose & Co., and did not state the individual names of the partners composing the firm. The judgment was by default, and the plaintiffs’ damages were assessed under a writ of inquiry. The rendition of the judgment by default is assigned as error.
    
      D W. BaiNe, for the appellant, cited Reid & Co. v. McLeod, 20 Ala. 576.
    R. 0. Toreey, contra.
    
   STONE, J.

Although the complaint in this case is filed in the name of I. C. Dubose & Co., the names of the parties plaintiff are fully set out in the summons which accompanied it. This error was amendable in the court below, while the suit was in progress, and, after judgment, must be considered as amended. — Code, § 2404.

Judgment affirmed.  