Morris v. Wood

1 White & W. 762
CourtTexas Commission of Appeals
DecidedDecember 14, 1881
DocketNo. 1150, Op. Book No. 3, p. 338
StatusPublished

This text of 1 White & W. 762 (Morris v. Wood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Commission of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Morris v. Wood, 1 White & W. 762 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1881).

Opinion

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1311. Consolidation of suits; is discretionary with the court. Appellee brought two suits in justice’s court against appellant, one to recover a horse valued at $50, in which a writ of sequestration was sued out and levied upon the horse, and the other suit was upon an account.' [763]*763Upon motion of appellee, over the objection of appellant, the justice consolidated the two suits, and upon appeal the county court refused to disturb the consolidation or to dismiss the suit because of it, but rendered judgment in favor of appellee. Held, it would have been more regular to have refused to consolidate the two suits. The question presented, however, is as to whether the consolidated suit should have been dismissed on account of a misjoinder of causes of action. The question of multifariousness or misjoinder of causes of action in the same suit must be left to the discretion of the court trying the case, and that discretion will only be reviewed when a palpable abuse thereof is shown by the record. [Degress v. Hubbard et al., Sup. Court, Austin Term, 1881, unpublished.] In this case there is no such palpable abuse of the discretion made to appear.

December 14, 1881.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 White & W. 762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-wood-texcommnapp-1881.