C.F.R. » Title 20 » CHAPTER II—RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD › SUBCHAPTER B—REGULATIONS UNDER THE RAILROAD RETIREMENT ACT › PART 216—ELIGIBILITY FOR AN ANNUITY › Subpart H—Child's Annuity

20 C.F.R. § 216.71

Who is eligible for a child's annuity

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

An individual is eligible for a child's annuity if the individual:

(a) Is a child of an employee who has completed 10 years of railroad service and had a current connection with the railroad industry when he or she died;

(b) Is not married at the time the application is filed;

(c) Is dependent upon the employee as defined in part 222 of this chapter; and

(d) Meets one of the following at the time the application is filed:

(1) Is under age 18; or

(2) Is age 18 or older and either:

(i) Is disabled as defined in part 220 of this chapter before attaining age 22 (the disability must continue through the time of application for benefits);

(ii) Is under age 19 and is a full-time student as defined in § 216.74 of this part; or

(iii) Becomes age 19 in a month in which he or she is a full-time student and has not completed the requirement for, or received a diploma or certificate from, a secondary school.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2012–2020 · leading case: Samuel Stephens, Jr. v. U.S. R.R. Ret. Bd., 704 F.3d 587 (9th Cir. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Samuel Stephens, Jr. v. U.S. R.R. Ret. Bd., 704 F.3d 587 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 8× “§ 231a; 20 C.F.R. § 216.71 (d)(2)(i). The Board ruled the petitioner, Samuel Stephens, did not qualify because during three out of the 30 years preceding his application, he worked at three menial jobs.”
Lisa Williams v. RRRB (7th Cir. 2020). “§ 231a(d)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 216.71 (a). Williams’s mother was credited, however, with only 107 months’ service.”
Lisa Williams v. RRRB (7th Cir. 2020). “§ 231a(d)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 216.71 (a). Williams’s mother was credited, however, with only 107 months’ service.”
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.