Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
The 2024 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
Total Results: 14
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2014-02-12T00:00:00-08:00
Citation: 132 So. 3d 1195, 2014 WL 538774, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1849
Snippet: usually required under state law in Florida.” . § 222.18, Fla. Stat. (2001). No. 3D12-2622 District
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2012-10-17T00:00:00-07:00
Citation: 100 So. 3d 1180, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18081, 2012 WL 4898017
Snippet: and such a designation is permitted under section 222.18(1), Florida Statutes (2010). We have previously
Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2008-05-01T00:53:00-07:00
Citation: 982 So. 2d 628
Snippet: Stat. (2007); disability income benefits, see § 222.18, Fla. Stat. (2007); firefighters pension benefits
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2005-03-30T00:00:00-08:00
Citation: 899 So. 2d 396
Snippet: entirely exempt from his creditors under section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1998), but instead classified
Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2001-05-03T00:53:00-07:00
Citation: 791 So. 2d 1078
Snippet: (1927). [7] In Zuckerman, we construed section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991), which exempts disability…process. See Zuckerman, 646 So.2d at 188. Section 222.18 contained the words, "of whatever form"
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1997-09-03T00:00:00-07:00
Citation: 699 So. 2d 765, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 10096, 1997 WL 537056
Snippet: garnishment is governed by Florida Statutes section 222.18, entitled “Exempting disability income from legal…are still subject to the protections of section 222.18 following payment to the beneficiary. In Broward….1997), applying the Broward analysis to section 222.18.2 Accordingly, we hold that the statutory exemption…exemption for disability benefits, provided by section 222.18, operates not only to protect such benefits in …exemption may not be waived. . Indeed, with section 222.18, there is not even the necessity of overcoming
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1996-05-01T00:00:00-07:00
Citation: 672 So. 2d 888, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4558, 1996 WL 210878
Snippet: debtor was exempt from garnishment under section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991), plainly required the
Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1994-11-30T23:53:00-08:00
Citation: 646 So. 2d 187
Snippet: fall within the exemption delineated in section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991), even when such benefits… lump sum and pursuant to a settlement. Section 222.18 reads as follows: Disability income benefits under…Zuckerman's assertion and find that section 222.18 is controlling. We need not resort to rules of … of Revenue, 365 So.2d 687 (Fla. 1978). Section 222.18 expressly reads that disability income benefits…these words leads us to conclude that the section 222.18 exemption is not contingent upon the form of payment
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1993-12-06T23:53:00-08:00
Citation: 629 So. 2d 218
Snippet: proceeds were exempt from garnishment by Section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991) which provides that "…benefits" exempt from garnishment under Section 222.18. The compromise and settlement agreement between
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1993-01-12T00:00:00-08:00
Citation: 622 So. 2d 1, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 69, 1993 WL 5678
Snippet: statutorily exempt from garnishment pursuant to section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991).* The court allocated
Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1985-10-16T00:53:00-07:00
Citation: 476 So. 2d 1357
Snippet: The legal question involved the effect of section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1983), which exempts disability
Court: Fla. Att'y Gen. | Date Filed: 1975-02-19T23:53:00-08:00
Snippet: valid loss of time coverage. . . ." See also s.222.18, id., exempting "disability income benefits
Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1932-01-27T00:00:00-08:00
Citation: 139 So. 201, 104 Fla. 123
Snippet: Wisconsin in the case of Ford vs. Smith, 60 Wisc. 222, 18 N.W. 925. For the reasons stated, the orders and
Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1904-06-15T00:00:00-08:00
Citation: 48 Fla. 271
Snippet: Detroit, 12 Mich. 445; Davis v. Rogers, 33 Me. 222; 18 Ency. of Pl. & Pr. 799. It also appears from