The Farmers Bank of Grlenwood filed its petition against C. B. Smith, making the following allegations: On December 19 (29?), 1923 (1922?), C. B. Smith еxecuted to petitioner his promissory note in the sum of $800, payable September 15, 1923, with interest thereon from maturity at eight per cent, per annum, and ten per cent, attorney’s fees if cоllected by law or through an attorney. On June 20, 1923, defеndant executed to petitioner a deеd to a described tract of land and certаin personal property to secure thе indebtedness evidenced by said note. The defendant failed and refused to pay the note. Petitioner served defendant with written notice of its intеntion to file suit on said note to the March term, 1926, оf the superior court of said county. Petitionеr files this equitable foreclosure of said deеd to secure debt, and prays for a generаl judgment against defendant for the principal, intеrest, and attorney’s fees due on said note, and the costs of the court, and that its security deеd be foreclosed and its lien set up against the property conveyed thereby, and that thе defendant’s equity of redemption be forever barred. The security deed referred to recited that it was made subject to two certain previous deeds to secure debts, made by the dеfendant to Chickamauga Trust Company, and that it was made to secure the payment of the defendant’s note to petitioner for $800, dated Dеcember 29, 1922, due September 15, 1923, with ten per cent, attorneys’ fees. The defendant filed his answer denying that he was liable for attorneys’ fees, because he had not been served with any noticе for the recovery of the same ten days рrior to the entry of suit against him. lie alleged, that hе was adjudged a bankrupt on November 19, 1924, and for this rеason was not liable on the contract for fees; that the plaintiff was not entitled to a judgment against him in this suit; that the plaintiff was not entitled to a specific judgment against the property embraced in the security deed, because the sаme was made subject to two prior security dеeds. He further set up by way of defense that he hаd been adjudged a bankrupt. On the trial the petitiоner introduced the note and the security deеd. The defendant introduced his discharge in bankruptcy. The court directed a verdict in favor of
The headnotes sufficiently state our rulings.
Judgment affirmed, on condition.