1. Contracts in general restraint of trade are void. Code, § 20-504. A contract concerning a lawful and useful business in partial restraint of trade and reasonably limited as to time and territory is not void. Hood v. Legg, 160 Ga. 620, 627 (128 S. E. 891); Strauss v. Phillips, 180 Ga. 641 (180 S. E. 123); Kutash v. Gluckman, 193 Ga. 805 (20 S. E. 2d, 128). *295 2. The contract in this case, restricting the right of the defendant Sorrells to engage in the business of roasting and blending coffee, and reasonably limited in time to five years, and in territory to the “Greater Atlanta Area,” is valid and enforceable.

3. Misjoinder of parties and causes of action can only be taken advantage of by special demurrer. Riley v. Royal Arcanum, 140 Ga. 178 (1-b) (78 S. E. 303); Butler v. McClure, 177 Ga. 552 (170 S. E. 678); Wilkinson v. Smith, 179 Ga. 507 (176 S. E. 373).

4. The trial court’s rulings excepted to were limited to the general demurrers of the defendant, and argument by counsel for the plaintiff in error in his brief that there was a misjoinder of parties and actions presents no question for review by this court.

Judgment affirmed.