A worker was ceremonially married to his first wife in Georgia in 1936. They lived together in Georgia for three years and separated in 1939, but were never divorced. The first wife was still living at the time of the court case described below.

The worker began living with the plaintiff in 1942 in Florida. They had a son together. In 1946 they moved to Michigan, where they lived together as husband and wife until the worker died in 1958.

The plaintiff filed a claim for mother’s and child’s social security benefits based on the worker’s earnings record.

As evidence, plaintiff provided a copy of a judgment of a Michigan probate court, determining her to be the worker’s heir as his surviving widow.

She claimed that the worker’s marriage to his first wife was void because he was only 17 at the time of the marriage, and had not ratified his marriage once he became an adult. She claimed that she had a valid common law marriage to the worker.

However, the social security agency determined, based on its own independent investigation, that the worker was older than 17 at the time of his marriage, and that it was a valid marriage. Therefore, plaintiff could not have been his common law wife, as this would have been a bigamous marriage.

The question for the federal court of the Eastern District of Michigan to decide was whether the agency was bound by the state probate court decision. The Court held that it was not. The agency was bound to follow federal laws in making its determination and had not been a party to the state probate court case.

See Miller v. Ribicoff, 198 F.Supp. 819. See also Social Security Ruling (SSR) 62-62c.

This material should not be construed as legal advice for any particular fact situation, but is intended for general informational purposes only. For advice specific to any individual situation, an experienced attorney should be contacted.