
    CLEGG et al. v. TEMPLE LUMBER CO. et al.
    (No. 148-3095.)
    (Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.
    June 26, 1920)
    Parties <S^I4 — Pla.intiffs having separate demands cannot be joined.
    , Where all plaintiffs in suit to recover land asked for cancellation of a former judgment against them, and for repossession of their separate tracts, and one plaintiff also asked damages; there was a misjoinder of parties plaintiff.
    Error to Court of Oivil Appeals of Ninth Supreme Judicial District.
    Suit by W. E. Clegg and others against the Temple Lumber Company and others. Prom judgment for the named defendant, plaintiffs appealed to the Court, of Oivil Appeals, which affirmed (195 S. W. 646), and plaintiffs bring error. Judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed on recommendation of the Commission of Appeals.
    
      E. P. Padgett, of Hemphill, for plaintiffs in error.
    W. F. Goodrich, of Hemphill, and Minor & Minor, of Beaumont, for defendant in error.
   KITTRELL, J.

From the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals (195 S. W. 646) to which we refer, writ of error was granted by the Committee of Judges. In the view of the Supreme Court the suit, however styled, was essentially one for the recovery of land, and .the trial court’s sustaining of exceptions upon the question of misjoinder of parties plaintiff was correct. Hunt v. Johnson, 106 Tex. 510, 171 S. W. 1125. Plaintiff’s refusal to amend following that ruling of the trial court necessarily ended the case.

In this view we conclude that the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals should be affirmed on the ground stated.

PHILLIPS, C. J.

We approve the judgment recommended in this case. 
      <S=»For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     