Case ID: colo_17/html/0531-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Butler v. Metcalf.
    
      Appeal from, District Court of Lake County.
    
    Messrs. Parsons & Lyles, for appellant. .
    Mr. Hugh Butler, pro se.
    
    Mr. A. W. Stone, for. appellee-.
   Per Curiam.

This case is the sequel of the case of Butler v. Hinckley, ante. The cases were argued and have been considered together. ' In this instance the liability of appellant rests entirely upon - the claim that á co-partnership existed between Butler and Carleton. The evidence of such co-partnership is no stronger in this case than in the preceding case.

The decision in the former case must,- therefore, control in this. The judgment of the district court will be accordingly reversed. . .