20 C.F.R. § 416.803

Evaluation of evidence

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

Generally, the highest probative value will be accorded to a public record of birth or a religious record of birth or baptism established or recorded before age 5. Where such record is not available, and other documents are submitted as evidence of age, in determining their probative value, consideration will be given to when such other documents were established or recorded, and the circumstances attending their establishment or recordation. Among the documents which may be submitted for such purpose are: school record, census record, Bible or other family record, church record of baptism or confirmation in youth or early adult life, insurance policy, marriage record, employment record, labor union record, fraternal organization record, military record, voting record, vaccination record, delayed birth certificate, birth certificate of child of applicant, physician's or midwife's record of birth, immigration record, naturalization record, or passport.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1986–1995 · leading case: Lia Yang v. Donna E. Shalala, Hhs, Sec'y, 22 F.3d 213 (9th Cir. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lia Yang v. Donna E. Shalala, Hhs, Sec'y, 22 F.3d 213 (9th Cir. 1994). “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.803 . Specifically, the Secretary rejected Yang's Laotian birth record prepared in 1962 as evidence that she was born in 1919.”

Fred J. HERMES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sec'y OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs.; Soc. Sec. Admin., Defendants-Appellees, 926 F.2d 789 (9th Cir. 1991). “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.803 (1990). The oldest evidence, the SSA record of December 1953, contained a birth date that *792 could not be corroborated.”

Ly v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 629 F. Supp. 1181 (E.D. Mich. 1986). “20 CFR 416.803. . Decision of Administrative Law Judge, January 16, 1985, p.”

Pha v. Chater, 909 F. Supp. 508 (N.D. Ohio 1995). “20 C.F.R. § 416.803 . Finally, “[i]f the evidence submitted is not convincing, additional evidence may be required.”

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.