TERRELL, Justice.
This is an attachment proceeding brought by appellees pursuant to Section 30.30(5), F.S.A., the pertinent part of which is as follows:
"Whenever a party suing out any writ shall demand that the sheriff levy upon specific property and any one, other than the defendant, shall claim the ownership or right of possession thereof, the sheriff, at his option, may file a petition in the court out of which the writ issued and procure a rule to issue to the plaintiff and to the party so claiming the property or the right [ of] possession thereof, to show cause why the levy should or should not be made; * * the judge of such court, after due notice to all parties in interest, shall determine whether or not such property is subject to levy under the writ * * * in the event the property is ultimately held to be subject to the writ, the plaintiff's writ shall have priority over any writs levied subsequent to the date upon which the plaintiff's writ was delivered to the sheriff."
The basis of the attachment was a dishonored draft drawn by virtue of an irrevocable letter of credit on authority of which plaintiff had furnished the money to purchase a Beechcraft airplane now located at Miami. The original defendants were Aircraft Sales and Service Corporation and Ambica Airlines, Ltd. Service was secured by publication, the issues were submitted to a jury and a trial resulted in a judgment for the plaintiff. The trial court then dismissed the claim of F.J. Mobsby and directed that the airplane be sold on the rule day in January, 1950, as the property of the defendants. This appeal is from the latter order.
The decisive question presented here is whether or not the trial court proceeded as required by Section 30.30(5), F.S.A. and entered such a judgment as the law and evidence warrant.
We are convinced that this question requires an affirmative answer. We think the trial court was correct in both the procedural aspect and in the judgment entered by him. The evidence conclusively shows that the airplane in question was purchased with money of the plaintiff, that a bill of sale to the airplane was made by Beechcraft Corporation to Aircraft Sales Service Corporation, who in turn executed a second bill of sale to appellant Mobsby. The latter bill of sale was made by power of attorney to satisfy Federal law and for ferry flight only. The bill of sale to Mobsby was given by Aircraft Sales and Service Corporation through E.S. Safford who was an employee of Beechcraft Corporation. Mobsby was an employee of Ambica Airlines, Ltd. and Aircraft Sales and Service Corporation and was a citizen of this country. It is not shown that he paid anything for the airplane or the expense of ferrying it. Under such a state of facts, there was no basis whatever for Mobsby's claim, so the order appealed from must be and is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
ADAMS, C.J., and THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.