he did during work. There was ample evidence in the record, however, to support the contention that, during the training, Bill wore heavier clothing, was exposed to greater heat, underwent greater exertion, and was presented with more stressful than usual circumstances than he experienced during his regular work. In presenting its factual-sufficiency evidence, New Hampshire Insurance relies on the same evidence to argue that Bill did not exhibit a continuity of symptoms from the time of work to the time of heart attack and that Bill’s exertion during training was not any greater than his regular exertion at work. While there was conflicting evidence on these matters at trial, these conflicts are factual disputes to be resolved by the jury. See Golden Eagle Archery, 116 S.W.3d at 761 (<HOLDING>). Nothing in the record suggests that the
holding appel late court should not impinge on fact finders role of judging credibility of witnesses and resolving factual disputes holding trial court free to evaluate credibility of witnesses holding trial court is sole and exclusive judge of witnesses credibility recognizing the jurys role in evaluating credibility holding that in resolving sufficiency of evidence appeals court does not weigh evidence or review credibility of witnesses