Heap

The action which gives rise to this appeal is one wherein the plaintiffs sued to recover judgment against the defendants for a balance alleged remaining unpaid on-account of several crops of apples, each owned by a separate plaintiff and sold separately to the defendants. The court found in favor of plaintiffs, and from the judgment rendered defendant E. L. Askin appeals.

A unique situation is presented by this action in that four plaintiffs have joined in an action to recover a joint judgment based upon four separate contracts. Each contract was made separately and at different times and represented a separate and distinct purchase by Rodgers & Co., the defendant, and the joint judgment prayed for is the total of the four separate balances owing on the four contracts.

Inasmuch as the defendants made no point of the misjoinder of parties plaintiff or causes of action in the court below, nor have they raised any such question on appeal, we pass to a discussion of the one point urged by appellant for a reversal of the judgment. Appellant states this point in his brief in the following language: “Evidence not sufficient and against the facts.”

Under this heading appellant in his…