Michael and Debra Lampkin filed suit against the First Community Bank of Tifton “Bank”, alleging fraud and seeking to enjoin the Bank from foreclosing the security deed on the Lampkins’ property. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Bank, and the Lampkins appeal. We affirm, for reasons that follow. In reviewing grants of summary judgment, this Court conducts a de novo review of the law and the evidence. To prevail at summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law.1 So viewed, the record shows that on or about August 11, 2000, Walter Walker, Jr., executed a security deed, entitled “REAL ESTATE DEED TO SECURE DEBT With Future Advance Clause,” to the First Community Bank of Tifton, conveying property in Fitzgerald, Georgia, to the Bank. The deed listed the secured debt as, inter alia, 1 a promissory note in the amount of $12,803; 2 “all future advances from the Bank to Walker or other future obligations of Walker to the Bank under any promissory note, contract, guaranty, or other evidence of debt existing now or executed after this Security Deed . . .”; and 3 “all obligations Walker owes to the Bank, which now exist or may later arise. . . .” On or about September 26, 2000, Walker deeded the Fitzgerald property to the Lampkins via a warranty deed, which contained a clause noting that the deed was subject to that certain deed to secure debt from Walter Walker, Jr., to First Community Bank of Tifton, dated August 30, 2000,2 recorded in Deed Book 461 , pages 34-40 , Deed Records of Ben Hill County, Georgia, and the parties of the second part by their acceptance of this deed agree to pay the indebtedness secured thereby as the same becomes due. In November 2007, the Lampkins learned for the first time that the Bank was threatening to foreclose on the Fitzgerald property. Thereafter, the Lampkins’ attorney wrote to the Bank stating that in consideration for Walker’s conveyance of the Fitzgerald property to the Lampkins, they
assumed the balance of the indebtedness, which I understand to be payable at the rate of $185.00 per month, and the Lampkins further assert that all payments are current and are being timely made and accepted by your bank.3 The Lampkins desire to pay off the balance of this loan in full, and I am therefore requesting that your bank furnish us with a payoff of the promissory note referred to in this Deed to Secure Debt, which has an original principal amount of $12,803.00, and together with a daily accrual.4 After the Bank published notice of its intent to foreclose the Fitzgerald property, the Lampkins filed a complaint on June 2, 2008, asserting a fraud claim and seeking to enjoin the Bank from foreclosing the security deed. The Bank foreclosed and sold the property on June 3, 20085; the Bank was the highest bidder, purchasing the property for $25,906.49. Prior to the foreclosure, Walker was indebted to the Bank for more than $203,000.6 The Bank used various methods to collect the indebtedness from Walker, including foreclosure on various properties that he owned. The Lampkins allege that they never received any notice from the Bank that Walker was indebted to the Bank in an amount in excess of the $12,803 promissory note, and the Bank does not dispute this assertion. As of September 11, 2008, following the various foreclosures, Walker owed the Bank $198,176.66.
