Cases from cite.case.law:

J. KANE, N. P. A. v. STEWART TILGHMAN FOX BIANCHI, P. A. a C. P. A. a S. P. A. a, 197 So. 3d 137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 222.11(2). . . . Under section 222.11(2), “disposable earnings of a head of family” under $750 per week, are exempt from . . . “To decide whether monies from employment qualify for the section 222.11(2)(b) exemption, the relevant . . . Stat. § 222.11.” (quoting In re McDermott, 2011 WL 740727, at *2 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.2011))). . . . natural person who is providing more than one-half of the support for a child or other dependent.” § 222.11 . . .

In TOBKIN, v., 638 F. App'x 822 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . Stat. § 222.11. Whether the funds are exempt as “earnings” under Fla. . . . . § 222.11 is a question of law that we review de novo. . . . Stat. § 222.11, “we look to the decisions of the state’s courts.” . . . Stat. § 222.11(1)(a). . . . Stat. § 222.11). Federal courts interpreting Fla. Stat. § 222.11 have held the same. . . .

In TOBKIN, v., 638 F. App'x 822 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 222.11 is a question of law that we review de novo. . . . Stat. § 222.11, “we look to the decisions of the state’s courts.” . . . Stat. § 222.11(l)(a). . . . Stat. § 222.11). Federal courts interpreting Fla. Stat. § 222.11 have held the same. . . . Stat. § 222.11). . In Bonner v. . . .

MILJKOVIC, v. SHAFRITZ AND DINKIN, P. A. A., 791 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 222.11. . . . Stat. § 222.11(1)(c) (defining the "head of family” as "any natural person who is providing more than . . .

A. HART L. v. WACHOVIA BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a, 159 So. 3d 244 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . alleging he was the head of a family and therefore was exempt from garnishment pursuant to section 222.11 . . . Section 222.11, Florida Statutes (2005), provides in pertinent part: (2)(b) Disposable earnings of a . . . Hart “agreed otherwise in writing” to garnishment as required by section 222.11, when he signed the Guaranty . . . In that case, the court briefly described section 222.11(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), as providing . . . Appellants argue that the 2013 version of section 222.11 containing the 2010 amendments is the statute . . .

J. ULISANO, v. ULISANO, III a k a, 154 So. 3d 507 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 222.11, Florida Statutes (2013), provides a garnishment exemption for the head of a family. . . . than $750 per week, unless the debtor agrees to waive the protection from garnishment in writing. § 222.11 . . . Prior to 1993, section 222.11 included the following language: No writ of attachment or garnishment or . . . The current version of section 222.11 refers to the “head of a family” without geographical limitation . . . In construing section 222.11, “our first obligation is to give the words used by the legislature their . . .

IN RE CHESLEY, v. K., 526 B.R. 888 (M.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . . §§ 222.14 and 222.11, which ..are inapplicable to the present action. . . .

IN RE G. HERMAN, CIB LLC, CIB N. A. A. G. v. G., 495 B.R. 555 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . the $39,000.00 on deposit in the Paradise Bank account as exempt on Schedule C pursuant to section 222.11 . . .

IN RE IM, a k a I,, 495 B.R. 46 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 222.11(l)(a). . . . The SunTrust Account The Debtor claimed the SunTrust Account as exempt pursuant to § 222.11(2)(a) of . . . The term “earnings” is defined in § 222.11(l)(a) as follows: 222.11. . . . Stat. § 222.11(1)(a)(Emphasis supplied). . . . Stat. § 222.11(l)(a). . . .

DRAGOVICH V. G. v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, 872 F. Supp. 2d 944 (N.D. Cal. 2012)

. . . . §§ 219.30 and 222.11 (benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act)). . . .

USAMERIBANK, a v. KLEPAL, Jr. CB, 100 So. 3d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Klepal included an agreement for the garnishment of his disposable earnings in accordance with section 222.11 . . . Klepal] consented, in accordance with § 222.11, Fla. . . . DISCUSSION Section 222.11 addresses the issue of the exemption of wages from attachment or garnishment . . . Under section 222.11(2)(a), all of the disposable earnings of a head of a family less than or equal to . . . Effective October 1, 2010, the legislature amended section 222.11(2)(b) to add specific requirements . . . Section 222.11(1)(c) defines head-of-family as any person who provides for more than one-half of the . . . The majority concludes that the reference to section 222.11 in the garnishment sentence authorizes a . . . notes that Klepal’s consent to the issuance of the writ of garnishment is “in accordance with Section 222.11 . . . provides that the parties intend that the issuance of such writ would be in accordance with section 222.11 . . .

In COOK, Jr., 454 B.R. 204 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . . § 222.11(2)(b) (2011). Fla. . . . Stat. § 222.11 prevents the Trustee from having any interest in the Mr. Cook’s earnings from D & G. . . . within the definition of “earnings” as it is defined in § 222.11(l)(a). . . . Stat. § 222.11(l)(a) (2011). . . . Stat. § 222.1 l(l)(c) and that his wages are thus protected § 222.11 (2)(b). . . . .

In NEW RIVER DRY DOCK, INC., 461 B.R. 642 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . . § 222.11(b) plainly did not apply. . . . Stat. § 222.11(b) refers to garnishment and attachment and is utterly inapplicable to court orders sequestering . . .

In SW BOSTON HOTEL VENTURE LLC,, 449 B.R. 156 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2011)

. . . Likewise, it projected RevPar would increase to $222.11 in 2014. . . .

In PYATTE J. A. K. A., 440 B.R. 893 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . § 222.11(2)(b), the statute that provides an exemption for certain wages. D. . . .

GILL v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT,, 699 F. Supp. 2d 374 (D. Mass. 2010)

. . . . §§ 219.30 and 222.11 (Railroad Retirement Board); 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(j) (Veterans’ Pension and Compensation . . .

In WHITE, 455 B.R. 241 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . Section 222.11. . . . Section 222.11. 5. The Debtors are not entitled to the $2,000.00 Fla. Stat. . . .

CULLEN, III, v. H. MARSH,, 34 So. 3d 235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . BOA writ claiming, in part, that the money in the account was exempt from garnishment under sections 222.11 . . . (2)(c) and 222.11(3) of the Florida Statutes (2008). . . . Third, Marsh’s claim that the funds held by BOA are exempt from execution under sections 222.11(2)(c) . . . and 222.11(3) of the Florida Statutes does not contradict Patch-ett’s “claim” that she holds an unsatisfied . . . DCA 2002) (finding that the judgment debtor bore the burden of proving his entitlement to the section 222.11 . . .

In McDERMOTT, 425 B.R. 848 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . The debtors claim an exemption under Florida Statute Section 222.11 for funds they contend represent . . . The Chapter 7 trustee objects, arguing the debtors cannot claim exemption under Section 222.11 because . . . McDermott is a head of family as defined in Section 222.11(l)(c). . . . McDermott received from GLR qualify as “earnings” under Section 222.11(l)(a). . . . The amount of $54,079.59 is not exempt from claims of creditors under Section 222.11. . . .

In J. HOLMES,, 414 B.R. 868 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . The Chapter 7 Trustee objects to the claimed exemption pursuant to Florida Statute § 222.11 [DE 25, at . . . Are tips and gratuities considered “earnings” within the meaning of Florida Statute § 222.11 when they . . . The relevant portions of Florida Statute § 222.11 “Exemption of wages from garnishment” are: (1) As used . . . Ann. § 222.11 (West 2009) (emphasis added). . . . Stat. § 222.11). . . .

In LAMB, v. III, P. A., 409 B.R. 534 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . support for a child or other dependant,” as is required to be identified as head of family under section 222.11 . . . Crews, supra at 6-l(§ 6.27) (noting that prior to October 1, 1993, section 222.11 provided that all wages . . .

In WEINSHANK,, 406 B.R. 413 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Stat. § 222.11(2)(c), Art. 10 § 4(a)(2), and Fla. Stat. § 222.061. . . . Stat. § 222.11 (2009). . . . Stat. § 222.11(2) and (3) is unambiguous with regard to the dispute in this case. . . . Stat. § 222.11 does not lead to an absurd result. . . . Stat. § 222.11 (1992). . . .

NORTH STAR CAPITAL ACQUISITIONS, LLC, v. S. KRIG, v. C. v. B., 611 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Defendant(s) hereby agree(s) to waive any garnishment defenses that are waivable under Florida Statute 222.11 . . .

In A. MORINE,, 391 B.R. 480 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . Stat. 222.11, dealing with the wage earner exemption. In her Amended Objection (Doc. . . .

In STEVENSON,, 374 B.R. 891 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . the originally listed amount of $4,945.00, and claiming the new balance as exempt pursuant to Chapter 222.11 . . . , the Trustee claims that in any event the Debtor is not the head of a family as defined in Chapter 222.11 . . . Ann. § 222.11 (2007). . . . Ann. § 222.11(l)(c) (2007). . . . Ann. § 222.11 (2007). . . .

CADLE COMPANY, FDIC, N. A. v. PEGASUS RANCH, INC. R. L., 920 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . garnishees, Ponsoldt claimed an exemption for wages owed to him as “head of family,” pursuant to section 222.11 . . . Section 222.11 establishes the “head of family” exemption. § 222.11(l)(c), (2)(a) & (b), (3), Fla. . . .

In J. SINCLAIR, S. v. J., 417 F.3d 527 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 222.11(3). . . .

In J. SINCLAIR, S. v. J., 417 F.3d 527 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 222.11(3). . . .

M. KARWOSKI, v. STATE, 867 So. 2d 486 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Since it is also our obligation to construe section 222.11 liberally in favor of the debtor, it is reasonable . . .

L. CRAWFORD, v. CITY NATIONAL BANK, 851 So. 2d 897 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 222.11(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2002); Mazzella v. . . .

BROCK, v. WESTPORT RECOVERY CORPORATION,, 832 So. 2d 209 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . We affirm the trial court’s finding the “head of family” exemption under section 222.11, Florida Statutes . . . Brock filed a motion to dissolve the writ of garnishment, a claim for exemption under section 222.11, . . . Under section 222.11(2)(b), “[disposable earnings of a head of family, which are greater than $500 a . . . Section 222.11(l)(a), states that “ ‘[e]arnings’ includes compensation, paid or payable, in money of . . . To decide whether monies from employment qualify for the section 222.11(2)(b) exemption, the relevant . . .

In SANDERSON,, 283 B.R. 595 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . Prior to June 1, 2001, refunds were claimed as exempt under Florida Statute § 222.11, on the theory that . . . The claim under consideration is not claimed under Florida Statute § 222.11 but under Florida Statute . . . so because there is no statutory cap placed on wages of head of household under Florida Statutes § 222.11 . . .

In GREEN, M. J. E. v. M. J. E. v. M. J., 268 B.R. 628 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2001)

. . . Those statutes and their captions provide, in relevant part: 222.11. . . .

In D. SMITH, K. v. D., 263 B.R. 910 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2001)

. . . Although not exempt as wages within the meaning of Section 222.11, Florida Statutes, alimony payments . . .

In LAWTON,, 261 B.R. 774 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2001)

. . . options are exempt wages and are not property of his Chapter 7 estate pursuant to Florida Statute § 222.11 . . . the Debtor is not single and is not the “head of family” as that term is defined in Florida Statute § 222.11 . . . Florida Statute § 222.11 does not apply. . . .

WINDSOR- THOMAS GROUP, INC. v. PARKER, 782 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . .; § 222.11, Fla.Stat. (1999); Orange Brevard Plumbing & Heating Co. v. . . .

M. RUDD, v. FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA, FL,, 761 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . pursuant to section 222.12, Florida Statutes, he was exempt from garnishment of wages pursuant to sections 222.11 . . . plaintiff, we hold that a defendant’s assertion of the exemptions from garnishment contained in sections 222.11 . . .

CADLE COMPANY, v. G G ASSOCIATES L., 757 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . employr er as compensation for his services, and that he was a “head of family” as defined in section 222.11 . . . Grieco’s affidavit that the monies garnished were exempt as earnings as’ that term is defined in section 222.11 . . . /or personal services or labor.” § 222.11(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999) (emphasis added). . . . Thus, Grieco’s head of household affidavit under section 222.11 may not exempt all the “other monies” . . .

In MIX,, 244 B.R. 877 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . As support for its conclusion, the Bro-ward court noted that the legislature had twice amended § 222.11 . . . that its construction of Section 440.22 was consistent with the legislature’s treatment of Section 222.11 . . . reasoned that the legislature had neglected to amend Section 440.22 in a similar manner as Section 222.11 . . . compensation lump sum settlement [sic] were exempt from the claims of creditors as it was consistent with § 222.11 . . . the Trustee is proposing that since the Broward court compared the legislative intent behind Section 222.11 . . .

In MOODY D., 241 B.R. 238 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . However, a tax refund of withheld wages is not exempt pursuant to § 222.11, Florida’s wage exemption . . .

SUNSHINE RESOURCES, INC. a v. SIMPSON, LTS T. K., 763 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Sunshine contends the Hooley Settlement proceeds were not exempt from execution as wages under section 222.11 . . . We hold that the issue of the exemption pursuant to section 222.11 was tried by consent of the parties . . . trial court’s conclusion that the Hooley Settlement proceeds were exempt as wages pursuant to section 222.11 . . . See § 222.11(3), Fla. Stat. Sunshine cites Ellis Sarasota Bank & Trust Co. v. . . . Fla. 2d DCA 1982), and argues that even if the Hooley Settlement proceeds were exempt under section 222.11 . . . acknowledges that the debtor’s assertion that these proceeds were exempt from levy and execution under section 222.11 . . . See § 222.11(2)(a), Fla. . . . Section 222.11(2) exempts money paid for labor or personal services, and does not extend to the deferred . . . sum settlement of a lawsuit in reality constituted disposable earnings within the meaning of section 222.11 . . .

CADLE COMPANY, v. G G ASSOCIATES,, 737 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . dissolve the writ of garnishment, claiming that he was a “head of family” within the meaning of section 222.11 . . . consented in writing to his wages being garnished; and that he was the “head of a household” under section 222.11 . . .

HILL, v. HAYWOOD,, 735 So. 2d 539 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Section 222.11(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), provides that the disposable earnings of a family head . . . of family” as one “who provides more than one-half of the support for a child or other dependent.” § 222.11 . . .

C. VINING, Jr. v. I. SEGAL, K., 731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Segal moved to dissolve the writ, asserting that under section 222.11, Florida Statutes (1997), the funds . . . Under section 222.11(2), the determination of whether Segal’s accounts are exempt from garnishment hinges . . . on whether the account monies represent Segal’s “earnings” for his “personal services or labor.” § 222.11 . . .

In E. BRANSCUM, L., 229 B.R. 32 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . Stat § 222.11, the wage exemption Statute. . . . Florida Statute § 222.11, entitled Exemption of Wages From Garnishment, provides in pertinent part: ( . . . Stat. § 222.11. Relying on Refco Inc. v. . . . Stat. § 222.11 See e.g. . . . Stat. § 222.11. . . .

In E. SLUIS, P., 228 B.R. 775 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . these funds are accumulated head of household wages and thus, exempt pursuant to Florida Statutes § 222.11 . . .

In N. BRADDY M., 226 B.R. 478 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . See § 222.11, Fla. Stat. (1998). . . . Florida exempts wages from garnishment in Florida Statutes § 222.11. See § 222.11, Fla. . . . See § 222.11(2)(a), Fla. Stat. . . . As such, he was not entitled to the protection of § 222.11. . . . Brad-dy’s bankruptcy estate, and he cannot exempt them under § 222.11. . . .

In PETTIT, III, 224 B.R. 834 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . In Houser, the court interpreted the predecessor to § 222.11. . . . In October 1993, § 222.11 was amended. . . . Ann. § 222.11 (West 1998). . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 222.11 (West 1998). . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 222.11 (West 1992) . . . .

L. LINDSAY, v. UNITED STATES, 41 Fed. Cl. 388 (Fed. Cl. 1998)

. . . The adjustment included a lump sum payment of $222.11 for past performance and an additional $755.93 . . .

In LAWRENCE d b a d b a d b a LAWRENCE, v. P. JAHN,, 219 B.R. 786 (E.D. Tenn. 1998)

. . . . § 222.11, to add language expressly exempting wages received by debtors and deposited into debtors’ . . .

In LAZIN,, 217 B.R. 332 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . . § 222.11 to support the argument that these accumulated funds are not exempt. . . . . § 222.11 exempts wages received by the head of the family from attachment or garnishment. . . .

In H. WILBUR, 217 B.R. 314 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . Statutes Principal Mutual Annuity N/A Insurance Policies with: § 222.11 Fla. . . . Statutes New York Life $11,090 § 222.11 Fla. Statutes Mass. Mutual $ 60,341 § 222.11 Fla. . . . Statutes Prudential Life $ 12,000 § 222.11 Fla. . . .

In J. STROUP J., 221 B.R. 537 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . No. 7), the Debtors claimed an exemption pursuant to Florida Statute Section 222.11 of an unknown value . . . Second, Florida Statute Section 222.11 does not exempt deferred compensation. . . . Exemption under Florida Statute Section 222.11 for Deferred Compensation. . . . In this case, the Debtors are claiming an exemption pursuant to Florida Statute Section 222.11 which . . . Although Florida Statute Section 222.11 was amended in 1993, prior ease law interpreting the type of . . .

In HARRISON,, 216 B.R. 451 (S.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . Stat. § 222.11. . . . The relevant State statute at issue in the case at bar is Florida Statute § 222.11 entitled “Exemption . . . Fla.Stat. 222.11 (1995). The debtor has the burden of proving entitlement to an exemption. . . . This Court finds that the Deferred Wages are not exempt under Florida Statute § 222.11. . . . DONE AND ORDERED. . § 222.11 was amended effective October 1, 1993. . . .

In RYZNER D., 208 B.R. 568 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . In 1985, however, the Legislature amended section 222.11 by adding an additional sentence which provided . . . Stat. § 222.11 (1989). . . . Further, in 1993, the Legislature again amended section 222.11 to provide that the funds are exempt for . . . Stat. § 222.11 (1993). . . . Stat. § 222.11 (1983), especially the cases which construed the statute prior to its amendment. . . .

BROWARD, v. JACKSONVILLE MEDICAL CENTER,, 690 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 1997)

. . . of appeal was influenced in its decision by the legislative history of the wage exemption in section 222.11 . . . In 1985, the legislature expanded the exemption in section 222.11 by adding an additional sentence, which . . . account maintained by the debtor when said funds can be traced and properly identified as wages.” § 222.11 . . . In 1993, the legislature again amended section 222.11 to provide that the funds are exempt for six months . . . The legislative history of section 222.11 does not draw us to the same conclusion. . . . I also agree with the courts below that the language of section 222.11 is persuasive in the instant case . . . Section 222.11 clearly shows that the legislature can create such an exemption and spell out its parameters . . .

In H. WILBUR,, 206 B.R. 1002 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . . § 222.11. (Id.). . . .

In COLTELLARO,, 204 B.R. 640 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . award which constitutes either wages or maintenance and cure is exempt pursuant to Florida Statute 222.11 . . . FLORIDA STATUTE § 222.11 The Debtor further claims that any award for either wages or maintenance and . . . cure is exempt pursuant to Florida Statute § 222.11. . . . Florida Stat. 222.11(2)(a) (1996). . . . Stat. § 222.11 and any future wages recovered are not property of the Debtor’s estate. 4. . . .

In D. ALLEN,, 203 B.R. 786 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1996)

. . . . § 222.11 because those funds were not wages and were never declared as such on Debtor’s tax returns . . .

In J. LEE, E. a k a E., 204 B.R. 78 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1996)

. . . employee, and thus do not qualify for the wage exemption allowed a head of household pursuant to Fla.Stat. 222.11 . . . the earnings of an independent contractor is within the scope of the exemption granted by Fla.Stat. § 222.11 . . . 928 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1987) the Court held that “The payment of wages to an employee are exempt under § 222.11 . . . So.2d 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) in which the District Court of Appeals considered the applicability of § 222.11 . . . an additional support for this conclusion, the Schlein Court also relied on the 1985 amendment to § 222.11 . . .

BROWARD, v. JACKSONVILLE MEDICAL CENTER, INC. a, 673 So. 2d 962 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Prior to 1985, section 222.11 provided that no writ of attachment or garnishment or other process would . . . Thereafter, the Legislature twice amended section 222.11. . . . . § 222.11(3), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . We are constrained, however, by the Florida decisions interpreting the previous version of section 222.11 . . . Moreover, we note that the six-month limitation inserted by the Legislature when it amended section 222.11 . . .

In LEE, J. E. a k a E., 190 B.R. 953 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . . § 222.11, renewal commissions that J. Norris Lee (Debtor) earned as an insurance agent. . . . and, thus, do not qualify for the wage exemption accorded to a head of household under Fla.Stat.. § 222.11 . . . Fla.Stat. § 222.11(3). See In re Zamora, 187 B.R. 783 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1995). . . . Prior to the amendment, § 222.11 exempted "money due for personal labor and services,” as compared to . . . Fla.Stat. § 222.11 (1991). . . . .

In M. BEMISH,, 200 B.R. 408 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . the cash held by Chapter 7 Trustee in the amount of $5,786.38 was exempt wages pursuant to chapter 222.11 . . .

In R. G. ZAMORA,, 187 B.R. 783 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . . § 222.11. Therefore, the Trustee’s objection will be sustained. . . . Zamora qualifies as “Head of Family” under Fla.Stat. § 222.11(l)(c) for the two years prior to the Filing . . . United National Bank checking account as exempt earnings for personal services pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 222.11 . . . DISCUSSION Section 222.11, Fla.Stat., entitled “Exemption of Wages from Garnishment” provides in relevant . . . in Manning, including In re Schlein, 8 F.3d 745 (11th Cir.1993), are no longer controlling since § 222.11 . . .

In A. CORDERO, 185 B.R. 882 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . In 1993, the Florida Legislature amended Section 222.11, Fla.Stat., providing additional exemptions, . . .

J. WILLIAMS, III, v. ESPIRITO SANTO BANK OF FLORIDA,, 656 So. 2d 212 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 222.11(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), provides that the head of a family is exempt from garnishment . . .

In PUFF N STUFF OF WINTER PARK, INC. F. B., 183 B.R. 959 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . sovereign immunity regarding garnishment of wages of state and local government employees; (2) Section 222.11 . . .

In G. BRANDON A., 184 B.R. 157 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . explained that commissions from an independent contractor are not subject to the wage exemptions in section 222.11 . . .

In ADKINS,, 176 B.R. 58 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . . § 222.11 wage exemption by limiting the previously unlimited exemption to the first $500.00 of a debtor . . . Like section 222.25, section 222.11 is subject to the language contained in Section 6. . . .

In JUERGENS,, 176 B.R. 275 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . The 1993 act placed certain limitations on the Fla.Stat. 222.11 wage exemption by limiting the previously . . . Like section 222.25, section 222.11 is subject to the language contained in Section 6. . . .

L. BEARDSLEY, v. ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 647 So. 2d 327 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . The debtor also relies on section 222.11, Florida Statutes (1993), although it is not clear that the . . .

In B. PORTER,, 182 B.R. 53 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . In 1993, the Florida Legislature amended Section 222.11, FlaStat. (1993) which provided additional exemptions . . . The exemption claimed in the insurance commissions must be analyzed under FlaStat. § 222.11 (1991) which . . . Fla.Stat. § 222.11 (1991). . . . Circuit in In re Schlein, 8 F.3d 745 (11th Cir.1993) determined the exemptions provided in Section 222.11 . . . Stat. § 222.11 (1991), the Debtor is not entitled to exempt commissions earned prior to the filing of . . .

In CONNER,, 172 B.R. 119 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . claimed as exempt her personal property pursuant to Article X, § 4 Florida Constitution and Section 222.11 . . . trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of exemption for the property settlement pursuant to section 222.11 . . .

PALM COAST RECOVERY CORP. a v. V. CARTER, I,, 638 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . status, the court had rejected a motion for a garnishment judgment for a $60 wage claim, citing section 222.11 . . . employer had indicated that Katie Carter was its employee, but garnishment was denied pursuant to section 222.11 . . .

In A. HANICK M. a k a, 164 B.R. 165 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . . § 222.11. . . . Trustee’s contention that the commissions claimed as exempt are not within the exemption of Fla.Stat. § 222.11 . . . agent’s commissions, as compensation to an independent contractor, were not exempt under Fla.Stat. § 222.11 . . .

In RUTENBERG,, 164 B.R. 683 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . . § 222.11. . . . Stat. § 222.11. . . . that the Merrill, Lynch account is not a “bank account,” as that term is used in Florida Statute § 222.11 . . . therefore, the funds held within the account cannot be claimed as exempt as wages pursuant to F.S. § 222.11 . . . Florida Statute § 222.11 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: No writ of attachment or garnishment . . .

In MANNING,, 163 B.R. 380 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . case (“Debtor”), declared $4200 in a Great Western bank account as exempt under Florida Statutes § 222.11 . . . (“F.S. 222.11”). . . . DISCUSSION The issue before the Court is whether the money in the bank account is exempt under F.S. 222.11 . . .

In SCHLEIN SCHLEIN v. E. MILLS, Jr., 8 F.3d 745 (11th Cir. 1993)

. . . . § 222.11 (West 1989), provides an exemption for that part of a bank account that consists of the earnings . . . conclude that under Florida law, the earnings of an independent contractor are not protected under § 222.11 . . . Stat. § 222.11 which provides: No writ of attachment or garnishment or other process shall issue from . . . The debtor relied on the same Fla.Stat. § 222.11 that is in issue here. . . . Schlein is not entitled to the Fla.Stat. § 222.11 exemption. . . .

In SCHLEIN SCHLEIN v. E. MILLS, Jr., 8 F.3d 745 (11th Cir. 1993)

. . . . § 222.11 (West 1989), provides an exemption for that part of a bank account that consists of the earnings . . . conclude that under Florida law, the earnings of an independent contractor are not protected under § 222.11 . . . Stat. § 222.11 which provides: No writ of attachment or garnishment or other process shall issue from . . . The debtor relied on the same Fla.Stat. § 222.11 that is in issue here. . . . Schlein is not entitled to the Fla.Stat. § 222.11 exemption. . . .

In LANCASTER G., 161 B.R. 308 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1993)

. . . refund should be exempt from attachment, garnishment or process pursuant to Florida Statute Section 222.11 . . . Section 222.11 provides in pertinent part: No writ of attachment or garnishment or other process shall . . . of an individual and can be traced to wages, the Debtors argue, the funds are exempt under Section 222.11 . . . B.R. 471 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1989), the debtor also claimed that his tax refund was exempt under Section 222.11 . . . Statute 222.11 must be construed as written and cannot be extended by judicially legislating an additional . . .

M. REICHENBACH, v. CHEMICAL BANK OF NEW JERSEY,, 623 So. 2d 577 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Chemical Bank’s garnishment represented his wages, which were exempt from garnishment under sections 222.11 . . . Florida law exempts from garnishment the wages of a head of a household. § 222.11, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . . The purpose of section 222.11 is to protect wages earned by one who at the time relevant is a resident . . .

A. MAZZELLA, M. D. v. P. BOINIS,, 617 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Section 222.11, Florida Statutes (1991) provides in relevant part: No writ of attachment or garnishment . . . In an apparent attempt to clarify who qualifies for the wage exemption provided by section 222.11, the . . . courts in homestead protection cases to determine the meaning of “head of family” as used in section 222.11 . . . In conclusion, we hold that Mazzella is entitled to the benefit of section 222.11 whether we consider . . . As presently drafted, however, section 222.11 shields the head of a family from garnishment regardless . . .

In FRALEY, a k a, 148 B.R. 635 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . A subsequent amendment stated that the funds were also exempt under Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11. . . . exempt status under Fla.Stat. ch. 440.22 and (2) whether the same sum is exempt under Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11 . . . The first basis for debtor’s claim that the funds on deposit are exempt is Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11, which . . . workers’ compensation settlement are not wages and cannot be exempted from the estate under Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11 . . .

In D. WHEAT S. S. XXX- XX- XXXX, 149 B.R. 1003 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . . § 522(b) and Florida Statute §§ 185.25 & 222.11. 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2) I. . . . Florida Statute § 222.11 Florida Statute § 222.11 (“Exemption of wages from garnishment”) provides: No . . . Stat. § 222.11. . . . . § 222.11 since the Court has determined that the funds in the Debtor’s Plan are not wages, and, the . . . Hence, the Debtor’s interest in his Plan is not exempt pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 222.11. . . .

In PARKER, 147 B.R. 810 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . The relevant statute at issue in the case at bar is Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11, which provides: Exemption of . . . him based solely on this services as an employee and the distributions are exempt under Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11 . . . This Court found that Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11 was designed to protect the “fruit of one’s labor for the . . . argues that the reimbursements constitute money paid for services and are exempt under Fla.Stat. ch. 222.11 . . . Stat. ch. 222.11. Thus, such funds are not entitled to exempt status. . . .

In B. GLICKMAN, DDS, L. d b a MDFC EQUIPMENT LEASING CORP. v. B. GLICKMAN, E. D. D. S. P. A., 126 B.R. 124 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . . § 222.11. . . . . § 222.11. . . . . § 222.11) is not applicable to money due or paid to independent contractors. . . . The initial analysis then must be the extent of the exemption under F.S. § 222.11. . . . F.S. § 222.11 is not ambiguous and must be read literally. . . .

In A. ROSENQUIST, In J. HARTON, 122 B.R. 775 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1990)

. . . Rosenquist also argues that his interest in the Harris Plan is exempt as wages pursuant to Section 222.11 . . . Although Section 222.11 permits the head of a family to exempt his wages, the final sentence of that . . .

In L. MORROW A., 122 B.R. 151 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1990)

. . . . §§ 222.11 and 222.14. . . . Next, the Debtors argue that the Plan is exempt pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 222.11 which provides as follows . . .

VETRICK, P. C. v. HOLLANDER, P. O, 566 So. 2d 844 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Section 222.11, Florida Statutes This section exempts the wages of the head of a family from a writ of . . . The language of this section creates an exception to the section 222.11 head of the family exemption: . . .

In WELCH,, 115 B.R. 374 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1990)

. . . . § 222.11 and are subject to the claims of creditors. . . . household which were commingled with those of the non-head of household are not exempt under F.S. § 222.11 . . . The issue in McCafferty and in F.S. § 222.11 is whether funds, which were deposited in a bank account . . . These decisions were before the amendment to F.S. § 222.11. . . . . § 222.11 added the sentence “[tjhis exemption shall apply to any wages deposited in any bank account . . .

In SCHLEIN, 114 B.R. 780 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1990)

. . . Section 222.11, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part: No writ of attachment or garnishment or . . . independent contractor, and the sums in controversy are not exempt wages as contemplated by section 222.11 . . . In so finding the court held that section 222.11, Florida Statutes, would not apply to the funds. . . . The account of debtor Edward Schlein in Barnett Bank are not exempt as wages pursuant to section 222.11 . . .

GIBSON a k a v. BENNETT,, 561 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1990)

. . . 61.12(1) do not apply to create an exception to the exemption from garnishment provided by section 222.11 . . .

In A. KINDORF, Jr. COMMERCIAL NATIONAL BANK OF PEORIA, v. A. KINDORF, Jr., 105 B.R. 685 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . . § 222.11. . . .

In EASTER In S. KRAMER J., 106 B.R. 748 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . Florida Statute § 222.11 prohibits attachment or garnishment: “to attach or delay the payment of any . . . Section 222.11 applies only to wages which are owing, Financial & Inv. Planning, Inc. v. . . .

In TRUAX,, 104 B.R. 471 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . Debtor in the amount of $3,441.00 for the tax year 1988 is claimed as exempt wages pursuant to Section 222.11 . . . X, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution and Section 222.11 Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . in the amount of $3,441.00 for the tax year 1988 does not constitute wages for purposes of Section 222.11 . . .

In E. EWELL T., 104 B.R. 458 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . . § 222.11 indicates that the Statute intended to create an additional exemption in Florida. . . . Florida House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary noted in its Staff Analysis of the proposed § 222.11 . . .

K. COOPER, v. P. COOPER,, 546 So. 2d 107 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . thus available for enforcement by garnishment as an exception to the exemption contained in section 222.11 . . .

WATERS, v. ALBANESE,, 547 So. 2d 197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . The trial court determined that the alimony obligation was not subject to garnishment because section 222.11 . . . We note that the same public policy behind section 222.11 and the federal act, which prevents the debtor . . .

In L. JOHNSON, a k a a k a F. d b a a k a a k a R. a k a Jr. a k a, 101 B.R. 307 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . Const., Sec. 4; Fla.Stat. 222.11, et seq. . . .

In N. E. PASSI,, 101 B.R. 360 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . claim as an additional exemption from the claims of creditors: “Insurance settlement proceeds Fla.Stat. 222.11 . . . effect concede this point by arguing only that the settlement represents money exempt under Fla.Stat. § 222.11 . . .