Adamson

This is a motion to dismiss an appeal. The facts are fully set forth in the former opinion of this court, in Adamson v. Black Rock Power & Irrigation Co., 297 E. 905, by which the first decree was reversed. Upon the going down of the mandate, the district court entered another decree, from which the present appeal is prosecuted. The bill was against 357 defendants, and of that number 40 are now appealing. The ground of the motion *438 to dimiss is that all the parties to a judgment or decree must join, in an appeal or writ of error, or be detached from the right by some proper proceeding. Dolan v. Jennings, 11 S. Ct. 584 , 139 U. S. 385 , 35 L. Ed. 217 . But it is equally well settled that, when the interest of a defendant'is separate from that of other defendants, he may appeal without them. Winters v. United States, 28 S. Ct. 207 , 207 U. S. 564 , 52 L. Ed. 340 .

The very point raised by the assignments of error is that the interest of the defendants in the right to receive water is not defined and determined. In the former opinion of this court, it was said that the rights of defendants are “rights in water that are the subject of barter and sale and-of the dignity of estates…