This is a suit on a fire-insurance policy. At the completion of the evidence the judge directed a verdict for the defendant. The defendant pleaded a violation of the clause in the policy providing that same should be void “if the interest of the insured be other than unconditional and sole ownership.” The evidence demanded a finding that as a matter of fact there was an outstanding security deed to the land on which the building was located, in favor of a third person. There was no evidence sufficient to show any waiver of this condition and the verdict directed was demanded by the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.