
    FREEMAN v. KING.
    No. 8121 —
    Opinion Filed June 6, 1917.
    Rehearing Denied Nov. 6, 1917.
    (168 Pac. 436.)
    Appeal and Error — Verdict—Review.
    Where the verdict of the jury, in an action at law is approved by the trial court and there is evidence reasonably tending to support it, this court will not disturb same on appeal.
    (Syllabus by Hooker, C.)
    Error from County Court, Murray County; J. H. Casteel, Judge.
    Action by L. A. King against R." L. Freeman.
    Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error Affirmed.
    W. N. Lewis, for plaintiff in error.
    E. W. Pagan and T. N. Robnett, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

HOOKER, 0.

This is an action by King against Freeman to recover damages for the negligent breeding of his mare to a jack of the defendant.

The sole question here is whether there is any evidence to support this verdict. We think so. It could serve no useful purpose to reproduce this evidence on account of its nature. Suffice it to .say, that in our opinion, a question of fact was presented by the evidence, and the same was submitted to the jury under proper instructions, and under the established rule of this court, the verdict of the jury having been approved by the trial court and there being evidence reasonably tending to support it, we cannot disturb the same.

The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.  