Plaintiff-creditor brought suit to cancel and render null and void a deed to real estate from defendant-husband to his wife (also a defendant) as a fraudulent conveyance under Code Ann. § 28-201 (2). The court entered a directed verdict on behalf of defendants-appellees on the grounds that plaintiff had renewed defendant-husband’s note of indebtedness subsequent to its notice of the defendant-husband’s deed of conveyance to his wife. On appeal, we affirm.

The undisputed evidence produced by plaintiff itself *566showed that plaintiff had knowledge of defendant-husband’s conveyance of the real estate to his wife,prior to the time plaintiff renewed defendant’s loan. It is clear, then, that plaintiff did not rely on defendant-husband’s ownership of the real estate in issue when it subsequently extended him credit. Compare Gentry v. Cowan, McClung & Co., 66 Ga. 720; Gormley v. Askew, 177 Ga. 554 (170 SE 674). This being so, the plaintiff, as a subsequent creditor with notice, could not void the conveyance under § 28-201 (2). Jowers v. High Point Furn. Co., 10 Ga. App. 297 (1) (73 SE 415). The court properly directed the verdict on behalf of the defendants.

Judgment affirmed.