Cases from cite.case.law:

HERNANDO COUNTY SHERIFF S OFFICE v. SIKALOS, Jr., 141 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . contributions, decreasing workers’ compensation benefits on account of pension benefits runs afoul of section 440.21 . . . offset; rather, we hold only that where the fund is employee-contributory, it would violate section 440.21 . . . Section 440.21, now as in 1993, invalidates “[a]ny agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium . . . for the purpose of providing” workers’ compensation benefits — a circumstance prohibited by section 440.21 . . . The E/SA argues section 440.21 does not apply to the situation here because the inline-of-duty disability . . .

CITY OF PALM BAY, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 114 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2013)

. . . compensation benefits from an employee’s pension benefits in contradiction to the provisions of section 440.21 . . .

CABRERA, v. OUTDOOR EMPIRE FCCI, 108 So. 3d 691 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . binding, and consistent with the general proscriptive treatment of settlements contained in section 440.21 . . . See §§ 440.20(ll)(c) & 440.21(2), Fla. Stat. (2003).” Vallecillo, 982 So.2d at 735. . . .

ELIAS, v. WORLD WIDE CONCESSIONS, LLC d b a, 41 So. 3d 304 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . ." § 440.21(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . .

R. IVESTER, Jr. C. v. P. MILLER,, 398 B.R. 408 (M.D.N.C. 2008)

. . . . §§ 1-440.15(a)(5) (identifying the method of execution); 1-440.21(2) (addressing nature of garnishment . . .

SANDERS, v. CITY OF ORLANDO,, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Section 440.20(1 l)(c) reads: (c) Notwithstanding s. 440.21(2), when a claimant is represented by counsel . . . This statutory revision added the following: (c) Notwithstanding s. 440.21(2), when a claimant is represented . . .

In YATKO A. v., 416 B.R. 193 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. 2008)

. . . Gen.Stat. 1-440.21. . . .

VALLECILLO, v. BACHILLER IRONWORKS,, 982 So. 2d 734 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See §§ 440.20(11)(c) & 440.21(2), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . .

LARWETH, v. CONWAY,, 493 F. Supp. 2d 662 (W.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . the alleged predicate felonies (out of state, offenses were proper and within the meaning of CPL § 440.21 . . .

PATCO TRANSPORT, INC. v. ESTUPINAN,, 917 So. 2d 922 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See §§ 440.20(ll)(c), 440.21(2), Fla. Stat. . . .

D. TERRY, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CITY PENSION FUND, 885 So. 2d 916 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . ’s contention that the method used by the Board of Trustees to calculate a set-off violated section 440.21 . . . Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes, states “[a]n agreement by an employee to waive her or his right . . .

ULICO CASUALTY COMPANY v. FERNANDEZ,, 825 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . countenances such an arrangement; in fact, the CBA there was contrary to the provisions of section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF HOLLYWOOD, v. LOMBARDI,, 770 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 2000)

. . . This distinguishing factor requires us to consider the effect of section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes . . . Lastly, and most importantly, section 440.21 was not implicated in Grice, and therefore, in that case . . . we could not have addressed the interplay between section 440.21(1) and section 440.20(15). . . . Section 440.21(1) prohibits an employee from contributing to his or her workers’ compensation benefits . . . Lombardi contends that section 440.21 is similar to 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 1103(c)(1) (part of the Employee . . .

HRS, STATE OF FLORIDA v. G. PASCUAL,, 785 So. 2d 509 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . In Lombardi, the JCC was instructed to consider section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1993), and the claimant . . . This court’s decision in Pickard did not address the issue raised in the amicus curiae brief. . 440.21 . . .

CITY OF HOLLYWOOD v. LOMBARDI,, 738 So. 2d 491 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Nevertheless, we are cognizant of section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1993), which prohibits “[a]ny . . . received, and to which claimant contributed, such reduction in compensation may be violative of section 440.21 . . . If, on the other hand, no such provision exists, then we direct the JCC to consider section 440.21(1) . . . See § 440.21(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . . contributions, decreasing workers’ compensation benefits on account of pension benefits runs afoul of section 440.21 . . .

GAB BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. v. O. DIXON,, 739 So. 2d 637 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . See also section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), which prohibits "[a]ny agreement by an employee . . .

NOLAN, v. DELTA AIRLINES, 733 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . benefits, constituted an improper agreement to waive her right to compensation contrary to section 440.21 . . . no agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under this chapter shall be valid.” § 440.21 . . . City of Fort Walton Beach, 691 So.2d 580, 581, n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), section 440.21 exists “to redress . . . Accordingly, we agree with the claimant that section 440.21(2) was violated in this case. Id. . . .

HERIC, v. CITY OF ORMOND BEACH, 728 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Relevant to this issue is section 440.21, Florida Statutes which states: (1) Any agreement by an employee . . . , - So.2d -, 1999 WL 280805 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), this court held that it was a violation of section 440.21 . . . City of Fort Walton Beach, 691 So.2d 580, 581, n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), section 440.21 exists “to redress . . .

UNITED STATES v. G. GARRISON,, 133 F.3d 831 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . amount of intended loss to have been suffered by Medicare as a result of Garrison’s activity is $1,192[,]440.21 . . .

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT, v. GRICE,, 692 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1997)

. . . City of Miami, 645 So.2d 252 (Fla.1989), this Court observed that section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1985 . . . KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. . 440.21 Invalid agreements . . .

L. WILLIAMS, v. CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH,, 691 So. 2d 580 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Claimant has not Invoked section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1991), which confers broad powers on judges . . .

CHAMPLOVIER, v. CITY OF MIAMI,, 667 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . On the authority of section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993), as construed in Barragan, Mr. . . . Champlovier the full benefits to which he is entitled under section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993). . . . 440.15, Florida Statutes, while the claim that gave rise to the present appeal arises under section 440.21 . . . These parties manifested no intention to be bound for purposes of post^Barragan claims under section 440.21 . . .

GRICE, v. ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT, 658 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . We begin our discussion by observing that Section 440.21, Florida Statutes, precludes any offset for . . . 1982), "[t]he rulings in Hoagey [Jewel Tea] and Brown effectively synthesize the interplay between § 440.21 . . .

CITY MIAMI, v. BELL, CITY MIAMI, v. AROSTEGUI, CITY MIAMI, v. McLEAN, CITY MIAMI, v. A. MEYER, CITY MIAMI, v. THOMAS, CITY MIAMI, v. FAIR, CITY MIAMI, v. HICKEY, CITY MIAMI, v. A. LEIBNITZER, CITY MIAMI, v. J. KING, CITY MIAMI, v. PAREDES, CITY OF MIAMI, v. L. DAUGHERTY,, 634 So. 2d 163 (Fla. 1994)

. . . We rejected the ordinance as contravening section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), which prohibits the . . . Private employers were prohibited from taking offsets for workers' compensation benefits by section 440.21 . . .

BARBER, v. CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH, 614 So. 2d 669 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . A judge of compensation claims has jurisdiction pursuant to section 440.21, Florida Statutes, to consider . . .

In C. FREIGO D. p d b a, 149 B.R. 224 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . Stat. ch. 440.21 precluded an employer from deducting workers’ compensation awards from pension benefits . . . Fla.Stat. ch. 440.21(2). Thus, the purported waiver by the debtor was not valid. . . . FiaStat. ch. 440.21 provides: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. McLEAN,, 605 So. 2d 953 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . The supreme court cited Jewel Tea Co., in which the court held that section 440.21, Florida Statutes, . . . public importance: Whether an increase in workers’ compensation benefits, awarded pursuant to section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. AROSTEGUI,, 606 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . The supreme court cited Jewel Tea Co., in which the court held that section 440.21, Florida Statutes, . . . public importance: Whether an increase in workers’ compensation benefits, awarded pursuant to section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. V. BELL,, 606 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Tea, holds that the JCC has jurisdiction of claims to recover offsets taken in violation of section 440.21 . . .

MANDICO, v. TAOS CONSTRUCTION, INC., 605 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1992)

. . . unilaterally extracted” the cost of the premium for worker’s compensation insurance in violation of section 440.21 . . . It is true that section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1983), specifically provides that any agreement . . . Therefore, we conclude that the section 440.21 prohibition does not apply to such agreements by an independent . . .

FLEITAS, v. TODAY TRUCKING, INC., 598 So. 2d 252 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . While section 440.21(2) invalidates any agreement in which an employee waives his right to compensation . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. E. BURNETT,, 596 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Its rejection of the City of Miami ordinance as contravening section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. KNIGHT,, 596 So. 2d 104 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . agreement by an employee to waive his rights to workers’ compensation otherwise invalid under section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. JONES,, 593 So. 2d 544 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Court ruled that Miami’s city ordinance was preempted by the workers’ compensation law and that section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH, v. AMSEL,, 585 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . not take into account the rationale underlying the Barra-gan decision, i.e., that pursuant to section 440.21 . . .

CITY OF PENSACOLA v. WINCHESTER,, 560 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . a certified question, the supreme court ruled that a judge of compensation claims may apply section 440.21 . . . Chapter 440 has preempted local regulation on the subject of workers' compensation, and that section 440.21 . . .

BARRAGAN, v. CITY OF MIAMI, GIORDANO, v. CITY OF MIAMI,, 545 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1989)

. . . slightest; the claimants are not contributing to their workers’ compensation benefits contrary to section 440.21 . . . pension fund and not to benefits required under chapter 440, Florida Statutes, which is what section 440.21 . . . I cannot see how such a contractual agreement can be construed to be in violation of section 440.21. . . . The majority opinion inexplicably states that section 440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers . . . compliance with the required payments of chapter 440, not to reach outside this section of the statute. 440.21 . . . CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKER’S COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY’S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21 . . . Section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), an integral part of the workers’ compensation law, states: 440.21 . . . Under state law, section 440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers’ compensation benefits from . . .

GIORDANO, v. CITY OF MIAMI,, 526 So. 2d 737 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Florida Industrial Commission, 235 So.2d 289 (Fla.1970), or section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1985), . . . worker may be reduced due to the receipt of workers’ compensation benefits without violating section 440.21 . . . CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY’S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21 . . .

L, JUDY, v. TRI- STATE MOTOR TRANSIT COMPANY, a, 844 F.2d 1496 (11th Cir. 1988)

. . . . § 440.21 invalidates any agreement by an employee to pay any portion of his workers’ compensation premium . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 440.21 provides in part: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. BARRAGAN,, 517 So. 2d 99 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKER’S COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY’S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21 . . .

SOUTHWEST GULFCOAST, INC. d b a v. ALLAN, Jr., 513 So. 2d 219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . . § 440.21, Fla.Stat. (1983). . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. KNIGHT,, 510 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . is an “agreement by an employee to waive his right to workers’ compensation”, invalid under Section 440.21 . . .

GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. OF FLORIDA v. WILLCOX,, 509 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . of claimant’s rights to compensation under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes requires consideration of § 440.21 . . . Section 440.21 Florida Statutes (1985) provides: 440.21 Invalid agreements; penalty.— (1) No agreement . . .

In ART SHIRT LTD. INC. No. No. W. FRYMAN, v. SIM TEXTILE CO. Co. Co. Co. U. S. Pa. Co. B. No. W. FRYMAN, v. LOWENSTEIN CORPORATION, Co. s J. P. Co. No., 68 B.R. 316 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1986)

. . . amounts of $3,482.83 against the Defendant as Factor for Carna Mills in Case No. 82-2340, and of $17,-440.21 . . .

COOPER TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. MINCEY,, 459 So. 2d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . carrier is not entitled to a lien on his third-party recovery because of an alleged violation of Sec. 440.21 . . . judgment denied Mincey’s motion to strike and to deny claim of lien based upon a violation of section 440.21 . . . Section 440.21 states, in relevant part: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium . . .

CHANCEY, v. FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES, 426 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Presumably, this was a finding that the procedures used in this case did not violate Section 440.21, . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLES, DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT v. McBRIDE,, 420 So. 2d 897 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . The court reasoned that a contrary holding would violate § 440.21, Florida Statutes, which provides that . . . The rulings in Hoagey and Brown effectively synthesize the interplay between § 440.21 and § 440.20(15 . . .

TRW, INC. v. R. BETTS,, 407 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . compensation liability for payments made under the group plan, such a result being contrary to Section 440.21 . . .

In McLARTY INDUSTRIES, INC. RENFRO CORPORATION, v. McLARTY INDUSTRIES, INC., 2 B.R. 68 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1979)

. . . . § 1 — 440.1; see also, § 1 — 440.21. . . .

WATSON, v. WATSON,, 424 F. Supp. 866 (E.D.N.C. 1976)

. . . Under Sections 440.15 through 440.21 garnishment is not an independent action but is a proceeding ancillary . . .

HOFFKINS, v. CITY OF MIAMI, a, 339 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . claimant involuntarily to waive his rights to the workmen’s compensation law in contravention of Section 440.21 . . .

C. BOATRIGHT v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, a, 334 So. 2d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . not require the employee to waive his right to compensation for permanent partial disability (Chapter 440.21 . . . Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes. . . . agreements relied upon by the City totally ignore Sections 440.10(1), 440.11(1), 440.15(2) and (3), 440.21 . . .

BROWN, v. S. S. KRESGE COMPANY, INC., 305 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 1974)

. . . enrichment of a claimant, I believe that such a credit to the employer is not repugnant to Section 440.21 . . . Section 440.21, Florida Statutes, provides that: “No agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation . . .

CLEMENTS v. CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE CO., 40 Fla. Supp. 121 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1973)

. . . reduction of workmen’s compensation benefits by an employer in direct violation of Florida Statute §440.21 . . .

JEWEL TEA COMPANY, v. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION HOAGEY, v. JEWEL TEA COMPANY,, 235 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1969)

. . . This is contrary to Florida Statute § 440.21, F.S.A., which provides in part as follows: “No agreement . . . Jewel Tea, the employer, contends that Florida Statute § 440.21, F.S.A. is not violated in this case . . . compensation under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., requires consideration of Florida Statute § 440.21 . . .

THOMAS H. DODGE, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE OSAGE INDIAN AGENCY, ON BEHALF OF JOHN COSHEHE, JR. MAURICE F. HAMILTON AND WIFE, AND ARITA JUMP v. THE UNITED STATES, 176 Ct. Cl. 476 (Ct. Cl. 1966)

. . . This sum was partly from wages and other sources and $440.21 of it was from headright income. . . .

BIENVENIDO, v. FONTAINEBLEAU HOTEL,, 128 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1961)

. . . In addition to the foregoing, the claimant points to Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which . . .

MISSISSIPPI VALLEY GENERATING CO. v. UNITED STATES, 175 F. Supp. 505 (Ct. Cl. 1959)

. . . .$ 6,377.86 $ 440.21 November 11, 1954 through July 11, 1955 ............................ .. 6,416.71 . . .

SUTTON v. MACK ROTH,, 1 Fla. Supp. 63 (Orange Cty. Cir. Ct. 1951)

. . . Section 440.21 (2) is not applicable in this case because it deals only with agreements made prior to . . .

v., 39 B.T.A. 951 (B.T.A. 1939)

. . . There can be no question that the petitioner’s investment of $38,-440.21 in the mortgaged property was . . .