It has been the law of Texas for more than a century that, except in limited situations, only the husband could bring suit for community recoveries arising out of a wife's loss of earning capacity. Roberts v. Magnolia Petroleum Co., 142 S.W.2d 315 (Tex.Civ.App. 1940, writ ref., ( 135 Tex. 289, 143 S.W.2d 79)); Loper v. Western U. Teleg. Co., 70 Tex. 689, 8 S.W. 600 (1888); Gallagher v. Bowie, 66 Tex. 265, 17 S.W. 407 (1886); Ezell v. Dodson, 60 Tex. 331 (1883); Murphy v. Coffey, supra; Firence Footwear Co. v. Campbell, 406 S.W.2d 516, 411 S.W.2d 636 (Tex.Civ.App. 1967, writ ref. n.r.e.); Urban v. Field, 137 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Civ.App. 1940, no writ). Seventy years ago Judge Ocie Speer deplored the situation which recognized the wife's equality of ownership, yet denied that equality with respect to a wife's management of what she owned.
A pro forma party does not become a real party at interest in the litigation and he is deemed to have no recoverable interest in the subject matter of the suit. Rhodes v. Taliaferro, 119 S.W.2d 703, 705 (Tex.Civ.App., Ft. Worth, 1938, n.w.h.); Urban v. Field, 137 S.W.2d 137, 139 (Tex.Civ.App., San Antonio, 1940, n.w.h.); Roberts v. Magnolia Petroleum Co., 142 S.W.2d 315 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont, 1940, writ ref., 135 Tex. 289, 143 S.W.2d 79); Brown v. Jones, 134 S.W.2d 850, 852, (Tex.Civ.App., Amarillo, 1939, n.w.h.); Houston Gas and Fuel Co. v. Spradlin, 55 S.W.2d 1086 (Tex.Civ.App., Galveston, 1932, n.w.h.); Hill v. Kelsey, 89 S.W.2d 1017 (Tex.Civ.App., Dallas, 1935, writ dism.); Perkins v. Campbell, 63 S.W.2d 567 (Tex.Civ.App., Waco, 1933, n.w.h.); Speer's Marital Rights in Texas, Vol. 2, sec. 750, p. 576.
The appeal will be dismissed unless the appellants, on or before April 25, 1942, tender a record showing evidence of jurisdiction, together with a motion for leave to file the same as part of the record herein. 3 Tex.Jur. 757, par. 541; Urban v. Field et al., Tex. Civ. App. 137 S.W.2d 137. Supplemental Opinion.