# SSR 62-68: SSR 62-68. RELATIONSHIP -- MARRIAGE AFTER MEXICAN "MAIL-ORDER" DIVORCE

> Federal · Rulings · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SSA_SSR_OASI_SSR_62_68

## Section

- **Citation:** SSR 62-68
- **Heading:** SSR 62-68. RELATIONSHIP -- MARRIAGE AFTER MEXICAN "MAIL-ORDER" DIVORCE
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Rulings
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** Social Security Rulings / OASI / Family Relationships / SSR 62-68

## Text

A worker, A, was entitled to old-age insurance benefits. B filed
application for wife's insurance benefits on A's earnings record in March
1962, the month she attained age 62. A and B went through a marriage
ceremony in New York in December 1932 and have been living together in New
York since that time. A had previously been married but in 1930 had
obtained a Mexican "mail-order" divorce from his first wife, who is still
living. At the time of the divorce both he and his first wife were
domiciled in New York, and neither of them appeared personally in the
action though they were both represented by counsel. No other divorce has
been obtained by either A or his first wife and the latter has not
remarried. B knew about A's previous marriage but believed he had been
validly divorced from his first wife. A's first wife has never claimed
wife's insurance benefits on his earnings record.

The question is whether B qualifies as A's wife under section 216(h)(1)
of the Social Security Act. She met all other requirements for entitlement
to wife's insurance benefits beginning March 1962.

Under section 216(h)(1)(A), a woman is the wife of a worker for purposes
of entitlement to wife's insurance benefits on his earnings record if the
courts of the State in which he is domiciled at the time she filed her
application would find that either (1) the worker and she were validly
married at that time, or (2) she would have the same status as a wife with
respect to a share in the distribution of his personal property if he had
hied intestate.
urposes
of entitlement to wife's insurance benefits on his earnings record if the
courts of the State in which he is domiciled at the time she filed her
application would find that either (1) the worker and she were validly
married at that time, or (2) she would have the same status as a wife with
respect to a share in the distribution of his personal property if he had
hied intestate.

Under section 216(h)(1)(B), enacted in 1960, a claimant who does not meet
the requirements of section 216(h)(1)(A), may nevertheless be deemed to be
validly married to the worker for purposes of wife's insurance benefits
for months after August 1960, under the following conditions: She must in
good faith have gone through a marriage ceremony with the worker not
knowing of an impediment which made the marriage invalid; the impediment
must have resulted from the continued existence of a prior marriage of
either party, have arisen out of the dissolution of the prior marriage, or
have resulted from a defect in the procedure followed in connection with
her ceremonial marriage to the worker; she must be living in the same
household with the worker when her application is filed; and no other
woman who meets the requirements of section 216(h)(1)(A) is or has been
entitled to wife's insurance benefits on the worker's earnings record.

Under New York law, A's Mexican "mail-order" divorce would be considered
a nullity. Caldwell v. Caldwell , 298 N.Y. 146, 81 N.E. 2d 60
he worker; she must be living in the same
household with the worker when her application is filed; and no other
woman who meets the requirements of section 216(h)(1)(A) is or has been
entitled to wife's insurance benefits on the worker's earnings record.

Under New York law, A's Mexican "mail-order" divorce would be considered
a nullity. Caldwell v. Caldwell , 298 N.Y. 146, 81 N.E. 2d 60
(1948). Thus, in that State (which was the State of his domicile at the
time B file application for wife's benefits) he would be considered to be
still married to his first wife, and accordingly his marriage to B would
be considered absolutely void there. Magner v. Hobby , 215
F.2d 190 (2d Cir. 1954), B, therefore, would not qualify as A's wife under
either test of section 216(h)(1)(A), described above.

However, since no one who meets the requirements of section 216(h)(1)(A)
is or has been entitled to wife's insurance benefits on A's earnings
record, B can qualify as his wife under section 216(h)(1)(B). She went
through a marriage ceremony with A, believing in good faith that A's
previous marriage had been dissolved by a valid divorce; their marriage
was invalid because of an impediment arising from the lack of dissolution
of A's previous marriage; and she was living in the same household with A
when she filed her application for benefits.

Accordingly, it is held that B qualifies as A's wife under section
216(h)(1)(B) of the Act. Therefore, she is entitled to wife's insurance
benefits beginning March 1962.

## 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_68. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.
