A child, C, was born to its mother, B, and it’s father, R, who was not married to B. B was married to another man, P when the child was conceived and born. The child was born in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rican law at the time presumed that a child born during the marriage is the legitimate issue of the marriage. This presumption could only be rebutted by a judicial decree.

R had acknowledged the child as his own through the registry of Vital Statistics, and was listed as the child’s father on the birth certificate.

R passed away and, in November 1955, B filed for child’s social security benefits based on R’s earnings record. The claim was denied because the child was presumed to be the legitimate issue of B’s marriage to P (this is a very common presumption and mimics Lord Mansfield’s rule, an evidentiary rule providing that neither husband nor wife could give testimony tending to illegitimate a child born during their marriage). B exhausted her administrative remedies, and then appealed to federal district court.

On December 30th 1958, the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico 🇵🇷 affirmed, holding that the presumption of C’s legitimacy had not been rebutted as prescribed by Puerto Rican law.

Thereafter, in May 1959, P, the legal husband of B, brought a civil suit in Puerto Rico’s Superior Court, seeking to rebut the presumption of C’s legitimacy and have R declared to be C’s father. This suit was successful.

Having effectively rebutted the presumption of legitimacy according to Puerto Rican law, B sought to reopen the initial application for child’s benefits.

The question was whether this could be accomplished after the federal district court had affirmed the denial of the claim.

Happily for C, the answer was yes. This is because there was “new and material evidence” (i.e., the rebuttal of C’s legitimacy and the legal establishment of R as C’s father), and the request to reopen the claim had been made within four years of the initial application.

See Social Security Ruling (SSR) 67-22.

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.