## Facts

- Collier applied for Social Security retirement benefits, and eligibility turned on his date of birth.
- Collier asserted he was born February 20, 1927, and submitted a Virginia court-ordered delayed birth certificate issued in 1980 reflecting that date.
- The delayed birth certificate resulted from state court proceedings based on testimony from family and acquaintances and included an order amending Virginia vital records.
- Collier also submitted corroborating materials, including a driver’s license listing the 1927 birth date and supporting statements from family and friends.
- The agency record included conflicting age information from the 1940 federal census for Collier’s household, completed by his mother, indicating a seven-year-old child in the home, implying a later birth year (approximately 1932–1933).

## Issues

1. Whether the Commissioner may treat a 1940 census entry as controlling proof of age while substantially discounting a state court-ordered delayed birth certificate and corroborating evidence.
2. Whether the Appeals Council’s reversal of the ALJ and denial of benefits was supported by substantial evidence and consistent with SSA proof-of-age regulations.

## Decision

- The district court rejected the Commissioner’s objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
- The court remanded the matter to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.
- The court concluded the Appeals Council erred by giving dispositive weight to the census-based inference and by failing to properly evaluate the delayed birth certificate and related evidence under applicable SSA standards.

## Legal Principles

- Judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) asks whether the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards and whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
- SSA proof-of-age regulations require evaluation of the reliability and probative value of age evidence, including considerations such as timing, source, formality (including oath or penalties), and apparent motive to misstate.
- A state court-ordered delayed birth certificate is not automatically binding on SSA, but it can constitute strong evidence of age and must be weighed in accordance with SSA regulations rather than effectively disregarded.
- Agency reliance on a single, comparatively less direct or less reliable record to override more formal and corroborated proof may fail the substantial evidence standard, warranting remand for proper evidentiary evaluation.

## Conclusion

The court remanded because the Appeals Council’s denial rested primarily on an inferred birth year from census data and did not adequately weigh a court-ordered delayed birth certificate and corroborating evidence as required by SSA proof-of-age rules and substantial evidence review.


Collier v. Apfel, 91 F. Supp. 2d 904 (W.D. Va. 2000)