
    (May 26, 1920.)
    ALEX DELAP, Appellant, v. OLA LAWSON and O. K. LAWSON, Respondents.
    [190 Pac. 262.]
    Appeal and Error — Sufficiency of Evidence to Support the Judgment. *■
    Evidence examined anj held sufficient to support - the findings of the trial court.
    APPEAL from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, for Ada County. Hon. Chas. P. McCarthy, Judge:
    Action on promissory note. Judgment for defendants.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    J. R. Good and S. L. Tipton, for Appellant.
    Elliott & Healy, for Respondents.
    Counsel cite no authorities.
   RICE, J.

This is an action upon a promissory note in which judgment was rendered for the defendants. The appeal is from the judgment.

The appellant mates but one specification of error, as follows:

‘ ‘ The court erred in rendering judgment against the plaintiff, the same not being supported by the evidence in the record.”

This assignment is very defective. (Caldwell v. Wells, 16 Ida. 459, 101 Pac. 812; Newport Water Co. v. Kellogg, 31 Ida. 574, 174 Pac. 602; Citizens’ Right of Way Co. v. Ayers, 32 Ida. 206, 179 Pac. 954; Citizens’ Right of Way Co. v. Pollard, 32 Ida. 212, 180 Pac. 259.)

The evidencé contained in the record is conflicting. There is ample evidence to support the findings of the trial court. The judgment is affirmed. Costs awarded to respondents.

Morgan, C. J., and Budge, J., concur.  