
    King vs. Wright.
    Where trover was Drought for a mare in foal, which had been traded for a jack, the ground for recovery being'false representations made as to the qualities of the jack, and there was sufficient evidence to sustain the finding in favor of the plaintiff, and it was approved by the presiding judge, this court will not reverse it.
    
      (a.) If the declaration did not sufficiently describe the colt as sued for, it was amendable, and the justice of the case makes the recovery of both the mare and the colt proper
    December 21, 1886.
    New Trial. Amendment. Before Judge Branham. Floyd Superior Court. March Adjourned Term, 1886.
    Reported in the decision.
    Dabney & Fouche', for plaintiff in error.
    H. M. Wright, for defendant.
   Jackson, Chief Justice.

This case is suit for a mare in foal, and the recovery is of the mare and colt after birth. The suit was brought on the ground that the jack traded for the mare with foal was palmed off on the plaintiff as one that was good for mares, by false representations; there was evidence enough to sustain the verdict, and the judge presiding approving the verdict, it must stand. If the declaration did not sufficiently describe the colt as sued for, it was amendable and the justice of the case makes the recovery of both mare and colt proper. It is therefore affirmed, because the mare and her foal both belonged to plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.  