20 C.F.R. § 404.613

Evidence of authority to sign an application for another

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

(a) A person who signs an application for someone else will be required to provide evidence of his or her authority to sign the application for the person claiming benefits under the following rules:

(1) If the person who signs is a court appointed representative, he or she must submit a certificate issued by the court showing authority to act for the claimant.

(2) If the person who signs is not a court appointed representative, he or she must submit a statement describing his or her relationship to the claimant. The statement must also describe the extent to which the person is responsible for the care of the claimant. This latter information will not be requested if the application is signed by a parent for a child with whom he or she is living.

(3) If the person who signs is the manager or principal officer of an institution which is responsible for the care of the claimant, he or she must submit a statement indicating the person's position of responsibility at the institution.

(b) We may, at any time, require additional evidence to establish the authority of a person to sign an application for someone else.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1976–1980 · leading case: Loren S. Cheers v. Sec'y of Health, Educ., & Welfare of the United States, Defendant, 610 F.2d 463 (7th Cir. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Loren S. Cheers v. Sec'y of Health, Educ., & Welfare of the United States, Defendant, 610 F.2d 463 (7th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.613 (a) (1979). After the Administration has received from an individual a written statement as described, notice in writing shall be sent to such individual (or where he is a minor or incompetent, to the person who submitted the written statement on his…”

Leimbach v. Califano, 596 F.2d 300 (8th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) expressed concern over the Agency’s repeated failure to provide Leim-bach with correct information but agreed with the Agency that the children’s retroac-five entitlement date was June, 1974 because Leimbach had failed to file until June of…”

Holmes Ex Rel. Thompson v. Weinberger, 423 F. Supp. 149 (E.D.N.Y 1976). “20 CFR § 404.613 (b) is currently the only regulation which specifies a means of applying for insurance benefits which does not entail the use of the prescribed form.”

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.