Capato Ex Rel. BNC v. COM'R OF SOCIAL SEC.
631 F.3d 626
| 3rd Cir. | 2011Background
- Capato died in Florida in March 2002; his residence at death listed as Florida for intestacy purposes.
- Before treatment, Capato froze semen; his wife Karen subsequently conceived twins via IVF after his death.
- The Capatos had a natural child born August 2001; the will did not mention unborn children.
- SSA denied surviving-child benefits to the twins; ALJ and district court denied the claim based on traditional intestacy/definition rules.
- Court vacated in part and remanded to determine whether, as of the date of Capato's death, the twins were dependent or deemed dependent on him, under the Act.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is a living biological child posthumously conceived entitled to survivor benefits under §402(d) and §416(e)? | Capato argues undisputed biology suffices for child status. | Commissioner contends §416(h) and state intestacy rules govern child status in this context. | Yes, undisputed biological children are 'children' under the Act. |
| Should the court apply §416(h) and state intestacy law to determine child status here? | Not required; §416(e) defines 'child' regardless of intestacy. | §416(h) should be used to determine family status when needed. | Not required to invoke §416(h); §416(e) controls given undisputed biology. |
| Does Gillett-Netting control the outcome for posthumous, non-disputed parentage cases? | Biological offspring should be treated as children per Act. | SSA relies on limitations from §416(h) and Acquiescence Ruling. | Gillett-Netting applies; the court adopts the view that posthumous biological children may be 'children'. |
| What remaining step is needed before final entitlement decision? | Dependency status at death must be established. | Dependency is not yet determined under §402(d). | Remand to determine whether the twins were dependent or deemed dependent at Capato's death. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart, 371 F.3d 593 (9th Cir.2004) (posthumous children; §416(e) control; §416(h) not required where parentage undisputed)
- Vernoff v. Astrue, 568 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir.2009) (equal protection challenge; not excluding all posthumously conceived children)
- Jones ex rel. Jones v. Chater, 101 F.3d 509 (7th Cir.1996) (purpose of survivor benefits to replace support; liberal interpretation)
- Mathews v. Lucas, 427 U.S. 495 (U.S. 1976) (remedial purpose of Social Security Act)