QUESTION
You asked whether a claimant, who married another individual in Arkansas on July 17,
1986, but whose Illinois divorce from the number holder did not become final until
August 15, 1986, is unmarried for determining the claimant's eligibility for widow's
insurance benefits (WIB) on the number holder's earnings record as a surviving divorced
wife of the number holder, who died while domiciled in Florida.
OPINION
The claimant is not unmarried for determining her eligibility for WIB on the number
holder's earnings record because the Social Security Administration (SSA) would deem
the claimant's marriage to another individual valid.
BACKGROUND
According to the information provided, R~ (Claimant), who was born on November, married
R~, the number holder (NH), on August 10, 1957, in Illinois. On April 23, 1985, Claimant
filed a petition for divorce in an Illinois court, but the court dismissed the petition
on December 2, 1985. On June 26, 1986, NH filed a petition for divorce in an Illinois
court. Court records show Claimant attended pre-trial conference in July 1986, but
Claimant alleges she moved to Arkansas after filing for divorce and did not return
to Illinois for any proceedings. Claimant reported her attorney told her in July 1986
that he had taken care of the divorce. On July 17, 1986, when she was forty-seven
years old, Claimant married another individual, M~, in Arkansas, purportedly based
on her attorney's statements in July 1986. On August 15, 1986, the Illinois court
issued a judgment of divorce.
On May 20, 2014, NH died while domiciled in Florida. Claimant reported she did not
learn of the date when her divorce from NH had become final until she secured certified
copies of the divorce decree in August 2014. On September 23, 2014, Claimant applied
for WIB on NH's earnings record as NH's surviving divorced wife. Claimant reported
in her application that she was married to M~. Claimant currently resides in Arkansas
and receives old-age insurance benefits on her own earnings record. SSA has concluded
the relationship between Claimant and M~ satisfies the criteria for a deemed marriage
under Social Security law.
DISCUSSION
A claimant may be eligible for WIB if she is a surviving divorced wife of an individual
who died fully insured. See Social Security Act (Act) § 202(e)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 404.336(a) (2014). [1] A claimant may qualify as a "surviving divorced wife" of an insured individual if
her marriage to the insured individual was valid under the laws of the State where
he was domiciled when he died. See Act § 216(d)(2), (h)(1)(A)(i); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.336(a)(1), 404.345. If the claimant
is not (and is not deemed to be) the surviving divorced wife of the insured individual
under State law, but the claimant establishes to the satisfaction of the Commissioner
that she in good faith went through a marriage ceremony with the insured individual
resulting in a purported marriage between them which, but for a legal impediment not
known to the claimant at the time of such ceremony, would have been a valid marriage,
and the claimant and the insured individual were living in the same household when
the insured individual died, then the purported marriage shall be deemed a valid marriage
for determining the claimant's eligibility for WIB. See Act § 216(h)(1)(B)(i); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.336(a)(1), 404.346; Program Operations Manual
System (POMS) GN 00305.055A.1. A surviving divorced wife may qualify for WIB on the insured individual's earnings
record if, in relevant part, she is not married. [2] See Act § 202(e)(1)(A); 20 C.F.R. § 404.336(e).
Claimant's marriage to, and divorce from, NH are not at issue in this matter. The
evidence provided indicates Claimant was validly married to NH in Illinois and their
marriage ended in divorce on August 15, 1986, in Illinois. The issue in this matter
is whether Claimant's marriage to M~ is a valid marriage that would render Claimant
married for determining her eligibility for WIB on NH's earnings record as a surviving
divorced wife of NH.
The Act and regulations do not expressly address which law applies to determine a
claimant's marital status to an individual other than the number holder. However,
subsumed within the question of whether a claimant is entitled to WIB on the number
holder's earning record as a surviving divorced wife is the question of whether the
claimant was married to another individual. Therefore, we infer from the Act and
regulations on which State law determines marital status that the law of the State
in which a number holder was domiciled when he died would also determine the claimant's
marital status to another individual. See, e. g., Smith v. Heckler, 707 F.2d 1284, 1285 (11th Cir. 1983) (stating "appropriate criterion for evaluating
a claimant's eligibility for widow's insurance benefits is determined according to
the law of the insured's domicile at the time of his death" and analyzing claimant's
marital status at the time of number holder's death under the law of the number holder's
domicile). Similarly, we infer from the Act and regulations that if the claimant
is not (and is not deemed to be) validly married under State law, SSA may determine
the claimant's marital status to another individual using the Act and regulatory provisions
regarding federal deemed marriages. See Act § 216(h)(1)(B)(i); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.336(a)(1), 404.346.
In determining a claimant's marital status, SSA generally looks to the deemed-marriage
provisions before determining the legality of a relationship under State law. See POMS GN 00305.055C.1. SSA has concluded the relationship between Claimant and M~ satisfies the criteria
for a deemed marriage under Social Security law. Claimant provided an Arkansas marriage
license and certificate showing she and M~ went through a marriage ceremony resulting
in a purported marriage. The evidence also indicates Claimant went through the marriage
ceremony with M~ in good faith, not knowing of the possible legal impediment. Claimant
reported her attorney told her in July 1986, before she married M~, that he had taken
care of the divorce. Claimant also reported she did not learn of the date when her
divorce from NH had become final until in August 2014, more than thirty years after
she went through the marriage ceremony with M~. Thus, Claimant did not know of the
possible legal impediment at the time of the marriage ceremony and believed her marriage
to M~ was valid. Finally, nothing in the record indicates Claimant and M~ were not
living in the same household. Therefore, based on Act § 216(h)(1)(B)(i), 20 C.F.R.
§ 404.346, and POMS GN 00305.055, we concur with SSA's determination that the relationship between Claimant and M~
satisfies the criteria for a deemed marriage under Social Security law.
CONCLUSION
Claimant is not unmarried for determining her eligibility for WIB on NH's earnings
record.
Sincerely,
Mary Ann Sloan
Regional Chief Counsel
By: ________________
Brian C. Huberty
Assistant Regional Counsel