
    Argued and submitted January 28,
    judgment modified in part; otherwise affirmed on appeal and on cross-appeal February 27, 1991
    In the Matter of the Marriage of Leslie N. STAMBAUGH, Appellant - Cross-Respondent, and Evelyn Marie STAMBAUGH, Respondent - Cross-Appellant.
    
    (88-3404; CA A64339)
    805 P2d 756
    Paul Saucy, Salem, argued the cause for appellant - cross-respondent. With him on the brief was Saucy & Lipetzky, P.C., Salem.
    D. Richard Fischer, Astoria, argued the cause for respondent - cross-appellant. With him on the brief was Larson & Fischer, Astoria.
    Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Edmonds, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Husband seeks review of a judgment of dissolution and makes five assignments of error; wife cross-appeals. Husband’s only assignment that merits discussion is that the trial court made a mathematical error in computing the values of certain items of personal property. Wife concedes that the trial court erred when it valued the couple’s Oregon personal property at $1,000. The true value is $2,000.

Wife’s cross-appeal is without merit.

Paragraph 11 modified to reduce wife’s judgment to $240,250; otherwise affirmed on appeal and cross-appeal. No costs to either party.  