Lisa Perks v. Kenneth S. Apfel ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 99-3512
    ___________
    Lisa Perks, on behalf of Courtney   *
    Shea Bonhomme, a Minor Child,       *
    *
    Appellant,                    *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                            * District Court for the
    * Western District of Missouri.
    Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner      *
    of Social Security,                 *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellee.                     *
    ___________
    Submitted: August 16, 2000
    Filed: August 18, 2000
    ___________
    Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Lisa Perks applied for a surviving child’s Social Security benefits on behalf of
    her daughter, Courtney Shea Bonhomme, based on the earnings record of deceased
    wage earner Joseph Bonhomme, who died one month before Courtney was born on
    June 18, 1990. Perks now appeals the district court’s1 judgment affirming the
    Commissioner’s denial of child survivor benefits. We affirm.
    The Social Security statutes and regulations provide alternative methods of
    proving paternity so as to establish a child’s eligibility for child survivor benefits. See
    42 U.S.C. § 416(h); 20 C.F.R. § 404.355. Bonhomme and Perks never married, and
    they never lived together. Bonhomme never acknowledged in writing that Courtney
    was his child, he was never decreed by a court to be Courtney’s father, and he never
    contributed to her support. Thus, Perks cannot establish paternity under the criteria set
    forth in §§ 416(h)(2)(B) and (C). However, survivor benefits are also available to
    children who have the right to inherit the wage earner’s intestate personal property
    under the laws of his State of domicile, in this case, Missouri. See 42 U.S.C.
    § 416(h)(2)(A); 20 C.F.R. § 404.355(a)(1). Missouri law provides that a child born out
    of wedlock may inherit from her natural father if paternity is established by clear and
    convincing proof following the father’s demise. See Mo. Rev. Stat. § 474.060(2);
    Jones v. Chater, 
    101 F.3d 509
    , 511 (7th Cir. 1996). Clear and convincing evidence is
    that which instantly tilts the scales in the affirmative, when weighed against opposing
    evidence, and clearly convinces the factfinder of its truth. See State ex. rel. Hobbs v.
    Tuckness, 
    949 S.W.2d 651
    , 656 (Mo. App. 1997).
    Applying this standard, the Commissioner’s administrative law judge (ALJ)
    denied Perks’s application for child survivor benefits. The ALJ discredited Perks’s
    self-serving testimony as contradictory and unreliable, and he rejected other statements
    submitted in support of the application as inconsistent and not credible. Noting that
    Perks initially claimed that another man was Courtney’s father, until blood tests
    excluded him, and that Bonhomme gave Perks no financial support during her
    1
    The HONORABLE SARA W. HAYS, United States Magistrate Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
    consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
    -2-
    pregnancy and never told his family that he had fathered a child, the ALJ concluded
    that paternity had not been established by clear and convincing evidence. Having
    carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that the ALJ’s credibility findings must be
    accepted, see Dixon v. Sullivan, 
    905 F.2d 237
    , 238 (8th Cir. 1990), and therefore the
    ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See
    Briggs v. Callahan, 
    139 F.3d 606
    , 608 (8th Cir. 1998) (standard of review).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -3-