20 C.F.R. § 404.708
How we decide what is enough evidence
When you give us evidence, we examine it to see if it is convincing evidence. If it is, no other evidence is needed. In deciding if evidence is convincing, we consider whether—
(a) Information contained in the evidence was given by a person in a position to know the facts;
(b) There was any reason to give false information when the evidence was created;
(c) Information contained in the evidence was given under oath, or with witnesses present, or with the knowledge there was a penalty for giving false information;
(d) The evidence was created at the time the event took place or shortly thereafter;
(e) The evidence has been altered or has any erasures on it; and
(f) Information contained in the evidence agrees with other available evidence, including our records.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: Bahija JABBAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee
Bahija JABBAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee (1988)
“20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . In considering whether this standard has been met, the Secretary will look to several factors: 1) whether the information contained in the evidence was given by a person in a position to know the facts; 2) whether there was any reason to give false…”
Chan Wai King v. Sullivan (1991)
“” 2 20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . The Regulations of the Secretary provide that “preferred” evidence, when it is available, is generally accepted as convincing.”
Biddulph v. Callahan (1998)
“20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . While the Appeals Council makes no explicit mention of any of these criteria in its assessment of Biddulph’s business records, it appears to have accepted Biddulph’s representations as to the amount of her gross receipts for 1992 and 1993.”
Jackson v. Bowen (1988)
“*64 Citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.708 (e), 11 the AU also questioned the credibility of plaintiff's and Mr.”
Geraldine Gainey v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration (2002)
“20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . It is undisputed that Geraldine failed to offer any “preferred evidence” that either her marriage to Smith or Archie was dissolved.”
Bennett v. Schweiker (1982)
“See 20 C.F.R. § 404.708 (a). 4 The fact that the information contained in the census record may not have been obtained directly from the Houstons, however, does not destroy its probative value entirely.”
B-B v. Califano (1979)
“20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . The ALJ’s conclusion was therefore supported by substantial evidence.”
Notini v. Heckler (1986)
“20 CFR § 404.708 . III. The Social Security Act directs this Court to affirm the decision of the Secretary so long as it is supported by “substantial evidence.”
Ramirez v. Sullivan (1991)
“20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . The only issue for review by this court is whether substantial evidence support’s the AU’s determination that plaintiff’s birth date was November 24, 1925.”
Webb v. Bowen (1988)
“” 20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . In attempting to establish age, if a claimant offers “preferred evidence” as defined in 20 C.”
Dillard v. Massanari (2002)
“See 20 C.F.R. § 404.708 . 4 . The parties are advised that under the provisions of Rule 3(b) of the Rules for United States Magistrates in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, any party who objects to these findings and recommendations must file a…”
McMorrow v. Schweiker (1982)
“The standard applicable before the agency for this purpose is set out in the Regulations of the Social Security Administration, 20 CFR §§ 404.708 , 404.709. That standard requires a claimant to establish eligibility to *587 receive benefits by “preferred evidence” or, if it is…”
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.