# SSR 62-47: SSR 62-47: Rescinded

> Federal · Rulings · Rescinded

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_47

## Section

- **Citation:** SSR 62-47
- **Heading:** SSR 62-47: Rescinded
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Rulings
- **Status:** Rescinded
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** Social Security Rulings / OASI / Family Relationships / SSR 62-47

## Text

Rescinded September 14, 2018 by FR Vol. 83, No. 179, page 46771

An attorney successfully prosecuted claims for mother's and child's
insurance benefits after securing for his clients a court decree of
adoption which was necessary for their entitlement to the benefits
claimed. He requested the Administration to approve a fee of $150 which he
intended to charge his clients for services in connection with both the
court action and the claims. Held , the Administration could not
approve the fee because its authority to regulate or approve an attorney's
fee applies only to services rendered in connection with a proceeding
before the Administration and does not extend to services in a court
proceeding, even though the court proceeding may have been necessary for
successful prosecution of a claim for social security benefits.

Shortly after a worker died, his widow, W, age 43, filed a claim on his
earnings record for mother's insurance benefits for herself, and for
child's insurance benefits for C, a foster child, 8 years old and living
with her. For several years up to the time the worker died, C had been
supported exclusively by the worker and W, and had been living in their
household. C's claim was disallowed because he was not the worker's child,
legally adopted child, or step-child, as required by sections 202(d) and
216(e) of the Act. W's claim for mother's insurance benefits was also
disallowed because she did not have in her care a child, legally adopted
child, or step-child of the worker entitled to a child's insurance
benefit, as required by section 202(g)(1)(E). Both C and W met all other
requirements and would be entitled to benefits if C could qualify as the
worker's child, legally adopted child, or step-child.
W's claim for mother's insurance benefits was also
disallowed because she did not have in her care a child, legally adopted
child, or step-child of the worker entitled to a child's insurance
benefit, as required by section 202(g)(1)(E). Both C and W met all other
requirements and would be entitled to benefits if C could qualify as the
worker's child, legally adopted child, or step-child.

Upon receiving notice that the claims had been disallowed, W retained an
attorney to prosecute her claim. He obtained from the local office of the
Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance information about section 216(e)
and other pertinent requirements for entitlement. Upon the attorney's
advice and with his help, W instituted adoption proceedings in the
appropriate State court which resulted in legal adoption of C by W within
two years after the worker's death. The attorney then submitted to the
Bureau a request for reconsideration of the disallowed claims, proof of
the legal adoption, and a request for approval of a fee of $150 to be paid
him by W for specified services in connection with the request for
reconsideration and the adoption proceedings.

Since C was legally adopted by the worker's widow within 2 years after
the worker's death, and had been entirely supported by the worker and his
wife in their household when the worker died, under section 216(e), C is
deemed to have been the legally adopted child of the worker as of the date
of the worker's death. Accordingly, upon reconsideration the Bureau
reversed its initial determination and awarded child's and mother's
insurance benefits to C and W, effective with the month in which the
worker died.
by the worker and his
wife in their household when the worker died, under section 216(e), C is
deemed to have been the legally adopted child of the worker as of the date
of the worker's death. Accordingly, upon reconsideration the Bureau
reversed its initial determination and awarded child's and mother's
insurance benefits to C and W, effective with the month in which the
worker died.

After determination on the claims the question was whether the
Administration could approve the attorney's proposed fee covering both the
services he rendered in connection with the claims before the
Administration and the services he rendered in the adoption proceeding
which was instituted at least in part to further prosecution of the claims
before the Administration.

Section 206 provides, in part, as follows:

*** The Secretary may, by rule and regulation, prescribe the maximum fees
which may be charged for services performed in connection with any claim
before the Secretary under this title, and any agreement in violation of
such rules and regulations shall be void. ***

Regulations No. 4, § 404.976 deals with the requirement for obtaining the
Administration's approval of the fee which an attorney may charge for
services rendered in a proceeding under title II of the Act. Section
404.977a defines "services rendered in a proceeding under title II" as
"services rendered in connection with any claim . . . under such title,
including any services in connection with any asserted right calling for
an initial or reconsidered determination by the Bureau, a decision by a
hearing examiner or a decision or order by the Appeals Council." However,
§ 404.974 provides, inter alia, that services in any State or Federal
court proceeding shall not be considered services before the Social
Security Administration, for purposes of the fee regulation provision.
with any asserted right calling for
an initial or reconsidered determination by the Bureau, a decision by a
hearing examiner or a decision or order by the Appeals Council." However,
� 404.974 provides, inter alia, that services in any State or Federal
court proceeding shall not be considered services before the Social
Security Administration, for purposes of the fee regulation provision.

Under these regulations, the Administration has no authority to regulate
the fee charged by an attorney for his services in a State court
proceeding, however closely such court proceeding may be related to a
claim before the Administration.

Therefore, it is held that the attorney's fee for the particular
services rendered in the court proceedings for W's adoption of C is not
subject to regulation or approval by the Administration. The attorney was
so informed, and a fee of $50 was approved for his services in connection
with the prosecution of W's and C's claims for mother's and child's
insurance benefits before the Bureau.

## Nearby sections

- [SSR 60-9 SSR 60-9. STATUS OF CHILD IN THE WOMB](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_60_9.md)
- [SSR 61-8 SSR 61-8. VALIDITY OF DIVORCE OBTAINED OUTSIDE OF STATE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_61_8.md)
- [SSR 61-9 SSR 61-9. VALIDITY OF COMMON-LAW MARRIAGE WHERE PARTIES INTEND CEREMONIAL MARRIAGE IN FUTURE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_61_9.md)
- [SSR 61-63 SSR 61-63. STATUS OF CHILD UNDER UNFULFILLED CONTRACT TO ADOPT](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_61_63.md)
- [SSR 61-65 SSR 61-65. EFFECT OF INVALID DIVORCE WHERE PARTIES ARE ESTOPPED TO DENY ITS VALIDITY](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_61_65.md)
- [SSR 62-35 SSR 62-35. RELATIONSHIP -- PRESUMPTION OF LEGITIMACY OF CHILD BORN AFTER DEATH OF WORKER](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_35.md)
- [SSR 62-36 SSR 62-36. RELATIONSHIP -- CONTINUATION OF VALID MARRIAGE AFTER SUBSEQUENT BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_36.md)
- [SSR 62-37 SSR 62-37. RELATIONSHIP -- PRESUMPTION OF THE VALIDITY OF THE LAST MARRIAGE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_37.md)
- [SSR 62-47 SSR 62-47: Rescinded](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_47.md)
- [SSR 62-68 SSR 62-68. RELATIONSHIP -- MARRIAGE AFTER MEXICAN "MAIL-ORDER" DIVORCE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_68.md)
- [SSR 63-20 SSR 63-20: SECTION 216(h). -- RELATIONSHIP -- VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN FIRST COUSINS](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_63_20.md)
- [SSR 63-47 SSR 63-47: SECTION 216(b). -- RELATIONSHIP -- WIFE'S INSURANCE BENEFITS](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_63_47.md)
- [SSR 63-48 SSR 63-48: SECTION 216(h)(1)(B). -- RELATIONSHIP -- TRIBAL CUSTOM MARRIAGE -- DEFECT IN PROCEDURE](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_63_48.md)
- [SSR 63-49 SSR 63-49: SECTION 216(h)(1)(B). -- RELATIONSHIP -- DE FACTO MARRIAGE RESULTING FROM JAPANESE "CUSTOM MARRIAGE"](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_63_49.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_47. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.