
    H. P. SWINSON v. LANCE PACKING COMPANY et al.
    (Filed 20 November, 1935.)
    
      1. Pleading’s E a: Judgments It a—
    The denial of a motion to amend tlie complaint by adding two canses of action nonsuited on tbe evidence upon a former trial is properly entered upon tbe grounds of res judicata.
    
    2. Pleadings E c—
    Tbe trial court bas tbe discretionary power to allow a complaint to be amended by adding two new causes of action based upon tbe same subject of action as tbe original cause.
    Appeals by plaintiff and defendant Lance Packing Company from McElroy, J., at April Term, 1935, of Mecklenbubg.
    
      Oa/rswell & Ervin for •plaintiff.
    
    
      Tillett, Tillett & Kennedy for defendant Packing Company.
    
   Stacy, C. J.

Civil action for slander, tried originally at May Term, 1934, appeal by defendant, and new trial ordered 28 January, 1935, opinion reported in 207 N. C., 637, 178 S. E., 111.

Thereafter, plaintiff asked to be. permitted to amend bis complaint (1) by bringing forward again tbe two causes of action originally non-suited; and (2) by adding two new causes of action originally regarded as secondary publications. See case as reported on first appeal.

Tbe court denied tbe first part of tbe motion on tbe ground of res judi-cata (Revis v. Ramsey, 202 N. C., 815), and allowed tbe second part in bis discretion. Botb sides appeal. Tbe ruling on tbe first part of tbe motion is affirmed on wbat was said in Hampton v. Spinning Co., 198 N. C., 235, 151 S. E., 266, and tbat on tbe second part on authority of Grant v. Burgwyn, 88 N. C., 95.

Defendant’s appeal seems precautionary, as tbe matter presently debated doubtless would have been rendered academic by subsequent plea and motion. Capps v. R. R., 183 N. C., 181, 111 S. E., 533; Gordon v. Fredle, 206 N. C., 734, 175 S. E., 126.

On plaintiff’s appeal, affirmed.

On defendant’s appeal, affirmed.  