Mr. Caralis applied for social security retirement benefits, alleging that he was sixty-five years of age. In support of his claim he provided a copy of a Greek court order establishing his date of birth as February 10th, 2893. He claimed that the social security administration was bound to give full faith and credit to the Greek order.

The problem was that, over the course of thirty years on many different occasions, Mr. Caralis had consistently stated that his date of birth was February 10th, 1901. One of his close friends who was born in 1895 even testified that Mr. Caralis was several years ahead of him in school. Another close friend testified that he was a sailor with Mr. Caralis when Mr. Carlis was 18 years of age in 1920 or so.
Under these circumstances, social security felt it was not duty bound to give full faith and credit to the Greek order. Mr. Caralis appealed.

The federal district court sided with social security. Social Security had not been a party to the Greek court proceeding which set Mr. Caralis’ birth date at February 10th, 1893. There was not just substantial evidence, but ample and abundant evidence, to support social security’s decision. (Hmmm … I think I just invented a new legal standard – the ample and abundant evidence standard — or AAE for short).

See Caralis v. Celebrezze, CCH U.I.R. Fed. Para. 14,018 (U.S.D.C., N.D. Ind. 1/5/65).

See also Social Security Ruling (SSR) 65-34c.

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.