Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 222.18 (2025)

Exempting disability income benefits from legal processes.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
222.18 Exempting disability income benefits from legal processes.Disability income benefits under any policy or contract of life, health, accident, or other insurance of whatever form, shall not in any case be liable to attachment, garnishment, or legal process in the state, in favor of any creditor or creditors of the recipient of such disability income benefits, unless such policy or contract of insurance was effected for the benefit of such creditor or creditors.
History.s. 1, ch. 20741, 1941.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1976–2016 · leading case: Matter of Prestien, 427 F. Supp. 1003 (S.D. Fla. 1977).
Matter of Prestien, 427 F. Supp. 1003 (S.D. Fla. 1977). · cites it 7× “Section 222.18, which states that disability benefits shall not be liable to attachment, garnishment, or legal process in the state.”
Zuckerman v. Hofrichter & Quiat, Pa, 646 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1994). · cites it 8× “Zuckerman asserts that the district court's decision should be quashed since benefits paid pursuant to a disability insurance policy fall within the exemption delineated in section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1991), even when such benefits are paid in a lump sum and pursuant to a…”
Goldenberg v. Sawczak, 791 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 2001). · cites it 3× “10154, § 1, Laws of Fla. (1925). [5] See ch. 78-76, § 1, Laws of Fla.”
In Re Ryzner, 208 B.R. 568 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997). · cites it 11× “Fla. Stat. § 222.18 (1995). In In re Prestien, 427 F.”
Arnold, Matheny, Pa v. First Am. Holdings, 982 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2008). · cites it 2× “(2007); disability income benefits, see § 222.18, Fla. Stat. (2007); firefighters pension benefits, see § 175.”
Grau v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 899 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). · cites it 2× “Grau could have claimed these policies as entirely exempt from his creditors under section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1998), but instead classified them as nonexempt as a showing of good faith to his creditors and to avoid the cost of potential litigation over the exemption.”
Chesley v. Woodard (In re Chesley), 526 B.R. 888 (M.D. Fla. 2014). · cites it 36× “According to Chesley the “monetary assets” listed on the Amended Schedule C are exempt from creditors’ claims as “disability income benefits” pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 222.18 , 3 which states: Disability income benefits under any policy or contract of life, health, accident, or…”
Crotts v. Bankers & Shippers Ins. Co., 476 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). · cites it 2× “The legal question involved the effect of section 222.18, Florida Statutes (1983), which exempts disability payments from legal process.”
In Re Dennison, 84 B.R. 846 (Bankr. S.D. Florida 1988). · cites it 2× “§ 222.18 which provides that: “Disability income benefits under any policy or contract of life, health, accident, or other insurance of whatever form, shall not in any case be liable to attachment, garnishment, or legal process in the state, in favor of any creditor or creditors…”
Gebhardt v. Chesley (In re Chesley), 550 B.R. 882 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2016). · cites it 4× “38 The Exemptions Dispute On January 9, 2013, some eighteen months after the Petition Date, Debtor filed an amended Schedule C asserting that all funds he had received from the Parts Depot settlement are exempt “disability income benefits” under § 222.18, Fla. Stat. The Chapter…”
Montes v. Mastec North Am., Inc., 132 So. 3d 1195 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014). · cites it 2× “…under federal law in such cases "may not be identical to the elements usually required under state law in Florida.” . § 222.18, Fla. Stat. (2001).”
In Re Wines, 113 B.R. 787 (Bankr. S.D. Florida 1990). “The debtor relies on § 222.18, Florida Statutes. 3 However, the annuity in question does not appear to be one provided to the debtor on the basis of his disability, *790 although his ability to receive proceeds of the annuity earlier than his normal retirement age by virtue of…”
— 222.18(1) — 1 case
Castro v. Hidalgo, 100 So. 3d 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham Syfert, a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.