
    John J. Driggs, Appellant, vs. Warren Morely, Appellee.
    (IN CHANCERY.).
    Adhere a bill of complaint alleges a partnership between the parties, and asks to have it dissolved and tha(t th^oorpartnership effects bp sold; and also praying an account of all matters growing out of the co-partnership; and alleging that the defendant had certain unsettled. accounts with a third-person, his former partner, who was deceased, in which the, complainant had an interest, by pm>-ehase of the defendant and such deceased person, while they were partners, and praying a discovery and accounting by the defendant of such unsettled .matters^ — the dismissal of the bill at the hearing would be improper, because the complainant .was entiüed-to the discovery and accounting, and for that the bill was proper.
    4-ppeal fr-om.the .Dodge Circuit Court.
    The opinion of the Court furnishes a sufficient statement, ofs-the case, in the Court below,, for all the purposes of,understanding the point, determined on the appeal; apd ht.is deemed unnneqessary to extend the record of .-this-, case beyond the point .decided.
    
      Jl. L. Williams, for Appellant,.
    
      M.- C. Eatm,, for Appellee.
   By the. Cayri.

Larrabee, J.

The bill ¡of complaintv in the cause alleges a partnership; prays that it be dissolv-, ed, and .that the partnership property, consisting of certain? real estate and personal property, be. sold. It-also prays an accounting asrto all ¡patters growing out, of the. partnership, and also of certain unsettled accounts between the defendant and one Wheeler, his former partner, whose interest in the property, Driggs purchased, subsequent to his death. The deeree at Circuit dismissed the bill on the ground that the proofs did not sustain a. partnership between Driggs and Morely. But as it appears that there are certain unsettled accounts growing out of the business connexion of Wheeler and Morely, and as Driggs has an interest in these by virtue of his purchase, he has a right to an accounting as to these at least. Fer this reason the decree of the Circuit must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings. We do not deem it necessary to decide the question of partnership, as the complainant has the right, independent of this, to have the accounts of the former partnership, referred.

Decree reversed.  