
    Beaucaire v. Sawyer et al.
    Decebe : Modification. — There were three defendants, blit the district court by inadvertence rendered a decree against one alone, and an appeal was taken as to two of the defendants only. Held, that if the appeal had been taken against all, the decree would have been modified into a decree against all, but as it had been taken against two of the defendants alone the decree could only he modified into a decree against them alohe.
    Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County.
    Beaucaire and Sawyer formed a partnership on or about December 1st 1874, to engage in the barber and photograph business in Cheyenne: they contributed equally to the partnership fund and the profits were «to be equally divided. On the 7th of March 1876, they made a full settlement of their partnership accounts to that date, which showed a balance in Sawyer’s favor of $450, for which Beaucaire gave his note due in one year from its date, and that amount was thus taken out of the partnership account. In June 1876, Beaucaire sold the barber-shop branch of the business for $400, receiving and appropriating to himself the price. In October 1876, Sawyer sold the photograph branch of the business to P. C. Hoffman for $500, receiving and appropriating to himself the price; afterwards and before this suit Hoffman returned the property to Sawyer, and the latter and D. D. Dare converted it into stock for a new photograph firm.
    On the 19th day of October 1876, Beaucaire filed a bill for an accounting; making Hoffman and Dare parties defendant. The defendants filed their answer on the 20th day of November 1876. The district court having heard the case, rendered a decree in favor of the complainant (Beaucaire) for $478.82^ from which decree Beaucaire appealed, claiming that the amount decreed him was insufficient.
    
      
      W. P. Carroll, for appellant.
    
      E. P. Johnson, for appellee.
   Fisher, C. J.

Beaucaire, the orator, appeals from the decree, which was passed by the district court for him, claiming that the amount decreed to him was insufficient. The decree is affirmed as to its amount with costs of the appeal. That decree should- have been passed against all of the defendants, but by inadvertence was rendered against Sawyer alone; and had the appeal been taken against all, the decree would have been- modified into a decree against all; but, as it has been taken against Sawyer and Dare alone, it is modified into a decree against them alone.'

The records of the appeal were allowed because it was proper for Beaucaire to come here to obtain a correction in the decree below, so as to make it operate against Dare.

Decree affirmed.  