
    (86 South. 524)
    ROGERS v. HINES.
    (3 Div. 468.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    June 30, 1920.
    Rehearing Denied Oct. 21, 1920.)
    Landlord and tenant <&wkey;260 — Judgment for defendant proper, where property levied on was not subject to lien.
    Judgment was proper for defendant in a suit by attachment to enforce a landlord’s lien, where the evidence failed to show that the corn and other provender levied on was subject to a landlord’s lien.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Autauga County; F. Lloyd Tate, Judge.
    Suit by J. E. Rogers against P. R. Hines. Judgment for defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. Transferred from Court of Appeals under section 6, p. 450, Acts 1911.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. O. Timmerman, of Prattville, for appellant.
    P. E. Alexander, of Prattville, for appellee.
   THOMAS, J.

A trial had by the court without a jury, on oral evidence, resulted in a judgment for defendant.

The suit was by attachment to enforce a landlord’s lien, and the levy made on corn and other provender. We have carefully examined the record, and find thqt no error intervened on the trial. The evidence failed to show that the property levied upon was subject to a landlord’s lien.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and McCLELLAN and GARDNER, JJ., concur.  