Legal Document

430 U.S. 199 97 Supreme Court Reporter 1021 51 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 270 Joseph Atlantic CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Appellant,v.Leon GOLDFARB. Number 75-699. Argued Oct. 5, 1976. Decided March 2, 1977. Syllabus Under the Social Security Act survivors' benefits based on earnings a deceased husband covered by are payable to his widow regardless dependency, but under 42 Code KF62 § 402(f)(1)(D) such basis wife her widower only if he was receiving at least half support from her. In suit challenging these provisions, three-judge District held that different treatment men women mandated constituted invidious discrimination against female wage earners affording them less protection for their surviving spouses than is provided male employees. Held: The judgment affirmed. Pp. 204-217; 217-227. D.C., 396 F.Supp. 308, Mr. Justice BRENNAN, joined WHITE, MARSHALL, POWELL, concluded gender-based distinction created violates Due Process Clause Fifth Amendment, Weinberger versus Wiesenfeld, 420 636, 95 1225, 43 514; Frontiero Richardson, 411 677, 93 1764, 36 583. 204-217. (a) Such distinction, which results in efforts workers required pay social security taxes producing produced workers, constitutionally forbidden when supported no more substantial justification 'archaic overbroad' generalizations or 'old notions,' as 'assumptions dependency,' consistent with 'the role-typing society has long imposed' contemporary reality. 204-207. (b) Equal analysis here cannot center solely drawn between widowers widows must be focused well earners. 207-209. (c) fact employee's interest future 'noncontractual' does not preclude any claim equal denial, 'directly related years worked amount earned employee, needs beneficiaries directly . distributed according classifications do without sufficient differentiate among employees sex,' supra, 647, 1232. 210-212. (d) It appears 402(f)(1)(D)'s phrasing legislative history general scheme Old-Age, Survivors, Disability Insurance program, differential nondependent results, deliberate congressional intention remedy arguably greater former, rather an aid dependent earners, coupled presumption wives usually dependent. classification this latter unverified assumption it would save Government time, money, effort simply all require proof dependency both sexes, suffice justify distribution employment-related benefits. 212-217. STEVENS relevant spouses, merely accidental by-product traditional way thinking about females, something accident necessary Amendment disparate persons who have strong similarly situated spouses. 217-224. Keith Jones, Washington, D. C., appellant. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, New York City, appellee. BRENNAN announced delivered opinion POWELL joined. 1 Federal Benefits (OASDI) §§ 401-431 (1970 ed. Supp. V), widow. widower, however, 'was one-half support' wife.1 question case whether Amendment. 2 A Eastern employees, 308 (1975).2 We noted probable jurisdiction. 424 906, 96 1099, 47 310 (1976). affirm. 3 * Mrs. Hannah Goldfarb secretary City public school system almost 25 until death 1968. During entire time she paid full Contributions Act, 26 3101-3126. She survived husband, Leon Goldfarb, now aged 72, retired federal employee. duly applied widower's application denied explanation 4 'You qualify benefit because you meet one requirements entitlement. This requirement been your died.'3 5 declared unconstitutional primarily authority 514 (1975), stating: 6 '(Section 402(f)(1)(D)) its plaintiff, 'deprive families receive result employment.' 645, (1975). See also 583 (1973). 7 'Whatever may ratio contribution family expenses Goldfarbs while they worked, entitled dignity knowing tax contribute joint welfare couple husband's should predecease him. same rate there slightest scintilla proposition working concerned spouses' old age men.' F.Supp., 308-309. II 8 burdening task proving upon spouse presents indistinguishable decided supra. That decision (1973), plainly affirmance Court.4 9 statutes increased quarters allowance medical dental married member uniformed Armed Services depended him, service could over support. To classification, Defense argued: '(A)s empirical matter, our frequently husbands, husbands rarely wives. Thus, Congress might reasonably cheaper easier conclusively presume members financially establishing fact.' 688-689, 1771. But that, services sole purpose achieving administrative convenience, challenged statute violated Reed Reed, 404 71, 76, 92 251, 254, 30 225 (1971); Stanley Illinois, 405 656-657, 1208, 1215, 31 551 (1972); cf. Schlesinger Ballard, 419 498, 506-507, 572, 576, 577, 610 10 like instant case, presented context OASDI program. There provision father's insurance children care, authorizing similar mother's widows. Paula principal source family's support, died childbirth, baby Stephen. Stephen himself infant son. were allowed 402(d) ed., III), father ground 'mother's benefits' 402(g) available women. reversed, holding made 'indistinguishable invalidated Frontiero,' U.S., 642, S.Ct., 1230, therefore: 11 '(While) notion likely primary supporters entirely generalization denigration work whose significantly families' 12 'Section clearly operates, did Frontiero, deprive employment. Indeed, some ways pernicious. (I)n deducted Paula's salary during worked. failed worker received, deprived portion own order fund out others.' Id., 13 Precisely reasoning condemns case. For too, operates 'to employment': Goldfarb's quarter century secretary, yet, consequence 402(f)(1)(D), 'not (spouse) received (for spouse) Wiesenfeld thus inescapably compels conclusion reached differentiation Constitution, generalizations, 508, "old notions," Stanton Stanton, 421 7, 14, 1373, 1377, 688 1231, imposed,' 15, 1378, Thus "(b) y providing dissimilar (Fifth Amendment).' 77, 225.' 653, 1236. III 14 Appellant, focus analysis, earning female, unconstitutionally discriminated him dependency. gist argument analyzed perspective denial reflected class sufficiently appropriate deny unless dependent.' Brief Appellant 12. 15 rejected virtually identical appellant's predecessor argued statutory attacked regarded prospective beneficiary earner. 'pattern legislation reflects considered 'probable need' financial assistance widow, young maintain, males.' 73-1892, O.T. 1974, Page 14. Court, earner 'benefits sex.' 1233. contrary insistence, 12, 'dispositive here.' 16 From inception, program insurance. Covered employers into administered distinct revenues purchase economic consequences age, disability, death. insureds sex. colleagues, males broader hers. Plainly then disadvantages contributors compared men.5 section 'impermissibly discriminates provides earner, even though identical.' 654-655, 1236 (Powell, J., concurring). sense, course, disadvantaged operation statute, 'Social designed family,' 654, concurring),6 particular category security.7 Therefore challenge but, held, well.8 IV 17 Appellant's emphasis sex-based recipients emerges other arguments. These arguments merit. 18 accept settled appellant wide latitude create allocate noncontractual Salfi, 422 749, 776-777, 2457, 2472, 45 522 (1975); Flemming Nestor, 363 603, 609-610, 80 1367, 1371-1372, 1435 (1960). generally said id., 611, 1373: 19 'Particularly we deal withholding (Social Security), recognize can thought interpose bar manifests patently arbitrary utterly lacking rational justification.' 20 768-770, 2468-2469; Richardson Belcher, 78, 81, 84, 258, 231 Dandridge Williams, 397 471, 485-486, 90 1153, 1161-1162 (1970). 21 'does not, immunize (social legislation) scrutiny Amendment.' 257. permeated provisions draw lines classifying those Congressional decisions regard deference institution charged government responsibility making judgments light competing policies interests. '(t)o withstand constitutional challenge, gender serve important governmental objectives substantially achievement objectives.' Craig Boren, 429 190, 197, 451, 457, 50 (1976).9 classifications, revealed rest notions' 1377; 577; Mathews Lucas, 427 495, 512-513, 2755, 2765-2766, 49 651 (1976), so found offend prohibitions law. (1973); supra; Taylor Louisiana, 522, 692, 690 22 Therefore, 646-647, 1232, expressly predecessor, relying interes employee precluded protection. Rather, mean 'a right whatever treated equally regards flow employment,' nor 'sanction based.' 646, On contrary, need directly,' 'must B 23 next argues distinguished involving 402(f)(1)(D). Rather enacting presumptions expense trouble determining really dependent, widows, prove argued, rationally defines standards eligibility differing is, runs, presumed benefits, needier widowers, job (particularly older women), see Kahn Shevin, 416 351, 353-354, 94 1734, 1736-1737, 40 189 (1974), 1231; 354 n. 1737.10 24 'inquiry actual purposes' discrimination, 648, 1233, proves contrary. First, itself phrased terms need. chose award needy, had face need, criterion inclusion. Moreover, shows dependence critical factor categories.11 intended insure impact normally entailed loss earner's income due retirement, death, replace lost wages. Cf. Jimenez Weinberger, 417 628, 633-634, 2496, 2500, 41 (1974). paid, programs, categories population large assistance, insured earner.12 every eligible earner.13 accords system's purpose; degree suffers leves force. overall makes omitting ordinarily At events, nothing suggests reasoned needy widowers. Finally, refutes contention. old-age original Statutes-at-Large 622, pension himself, lump-sum payment estate certain circumstances.14 Wives' widows' first coverage extended 1939. Amendments 1939, 53 1360, 1364-1366. amendments afford adequate unit.' H.R.Rep. 728, 76th Cong., 1st Sess., (1939). (Emphasis supplied.) House Ways Means Committee criticized lumpsum 'make(s) payments person leaves dependents.' Bid. Board, initiated report transmitted President Congress, recommended adoption '(t)he monthly orphans, two chief classes survivors, furnish significant benefits.' H.R.Doc. 110, (1939).15 addition recommending Board suggested extension 'for worker.'16 6. Senate floor, Senator Harrison, proponent amendments, then-existing 'no (the earner) wife, dies leaving child, parents.' 84 Cong.Rec. 8827 indication gave attention specific despite lack compensate caused sex discrimination. recognized, 644, framers legislated 'then accepted man responsible children.' Hoskins & L. Bixby, Women Security: Law Policy Five Countries, Administration Research Report 42, 77 (1973).'17 27 Survivors' 1950. 64 483, 485. demonstrates disparity compensatory purpose. impetus change came Advisory Council Security, aged, (and) widower.' recommendation equalize given dependents men' '(u)nder present rights acquire.' Recommendations Legislation, S.Doc. 208, 80th 38 (1949). supplied part.) clear assumed equivalent previous lesser deliberately Although bill, H.R. 6000, became 1950 contain husbands' widowers' Finance added it, committee believes comparable.' S.Rep. 1669, 81st 28 (1950), U.S.Code Cong. Service 1950, Pages 3287, 3317. conclude, therefore, asserts, precisely situation faced Wiesenfeld. conceivable writing wives' assumption, verified 689, 1771, here, sexes.18 again therefore hold assumptions 29 Affirmed. STEVENS, concurring judgment. my same, appraisal reasons concluding unjustified, somewhat expressed BRENNAN. 32 N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions agree REHNQUIST raised plaintiff requires us wife's obligation. contractual control payment; moreover, form compensation services.1 level, tax, single, young, head small one. ultimately become variety including families, ex-wives vary enormously, variations convert uniform obligation unequal funded revenues. short, am persuaded earners.2 33 Second, treats widows3 favorably counterparts 'invidious.' imply inferior 516, 2767, (Stevens, dissenting); condemn misconduct unrepresentative few, 211, 464, concurring); add burdens already discrete minority. Hampton Mow Sun Wong, 426 88, 102, 1895, 1904, 48 495. does, treat differently 34 Third, correctly identifies hypothetical justifications comparable acceptable 189. Neither 'administrative convenience' rationale 'policy cushioning spousal imposes disproportionately heavy burden,' 355, 1737, described wholly irrational. Nevertheless, find unacceptable 35 administrative-convenience rests cost justified eliminating burden requiring establish fact. REHNQUIST'S careful data, post, 238-239, 10% bracket nondependent. Omitting expedites processing 90% applications. convenience procedures certainly developed minimize burden.4 what offsetting imposed Nation achieve convenience? Assuming authorized administering truly staggering price relatively modest gain: hundreds thousands within perhaps $750 million year.5 figures earlier presumably smaller, still relation possible savings. inconceivable expenditures indeed, discussing problem. convinced reason discrimination.6 37 product conscious redress 'legacy discrimination' females. 359, 1739 (Brennan, dissenting). successful market husbands. special most 'suddenly forced unfamiliar, which, former will fewer skills offer.' 354, 1737. females victims historic discussed Kahn. Respect process precludes irrational lawmaking. step-by-step evolution included provide separate Admittedly, each benign consider never divide sex.7 view 'dependents' satisfy test later men.8 fair infer habit, reflection, seem equate 'widow' 'dependent spouse.' kind automatic reflex far either favor past wrongs, savings exceed extending 39 group byproduct rule effects questionable 'due legitimate presuming actually (the) interest' put forward justification. 103, 1905.9 judgment, correct, Shevin? involved originated 1885; vintage supposed motivated repudiate 19th males.10 seems clear, upheld Florida legislature's motivation. premise, controlling believe applies 514. attempt use 'mere recitation benign, purpose' 'an shield,' "archaic generalization(s),' 643, 1230. They totally excluded just exclusion apparently rise If inconsistency follow unanimous earlier, sharply divided decision. And cases distinguishable, closer facts reasons, concur Court's REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, STEWART, BLACKMUN join, dissenting. 44 recent beginning (1971), say Court. One can, consideration affords opposite me largely principles deduced indicate wrong result. heightened levels Protection Clause, areas law outside field legislation, uncritically carried field. phrase 'social insurance' sort magic automatically mutes component suggest distributes literally millions people characteristics many types statutes. typically expanded amendment period impossible fits mathematical nicety carefully conceived plan second low-level considerations area bear much vital concern certainty determination entitlement promptness 46 principle sustained set forth effect make obtain since show perpetuates exacerbates disadvantage led conclude classifications. property exemption Kahn, "rest(s) difference having object legislation." Both undoubtedly plurality overstates relevance says 'plainly Court.' Ante, 204. end inquiry. legitimacy, irrebuttable presumptions, doctrine distinctions contexts used comprehensive schemes dealing distinctions. Levy 391 68, 88 1509, 436 (1968), Louisiana illegitimate recover wrongful mother Fourteenth Another grounds Weber Aetna Cas. Surety Co., 406 164, 1400, 768 (1972). defended recovery workmen's children, acknowledged illegitimates permitted children. Clause. Two Terms invalid child's Act. flatly notwithstanding disabled parent, granting legitimates demonstrated parent. relied Weber, reach Updated: January Term, specified illegitimacy define singled out. (1972), Illinois guarantee hearing parental fitness unwed granted parents custody challenged. Cleveland Education LaFleur, 414 632, 791, 52 likewise board regulations pregnant teachers take unpaid maternity leave commencing four five months before expected birth. Yet, Term following duration-of-relationship declined extend complex saying: 'We think holdings Stanley, Vlandis (v. Kline, 412 441, 91 50) LaFleur issue turn virtual engine destruction countless heretofore Constitution.' 772, 2470. 54 begins Idaho probate code contained across-the-board flat preference putative administrators decedent. relating military showing fact, claim. fringe competitive business industry. 679, 1766. 55 refused invalidate behest taxpayer taxation $500. year later, widower. said: 56 'Since explained problems women, Frontiero. Like there, '(b)y situated, (Due Process) Clause.' (1971).' 57 observations pertinent. possibility obtaining matter made. attack foreclose Each proscriptions While inconsistent Salfi complete harmony recognition plans. 58 Those arise nature problem numerous sessions defining participatory outset, sense close relationship paying life. legislate idea fulfilling narrow owed participant. continually amounts pool singling additional, identifiable groups requisite contributing justifies assistance. difficult predict traits emerging expansion. 59 resulting extends piecemeal fashion. individuals demonstrably great qualifying nonetheless class. classes, formulated reformulated decades, perfectly mirror abstract definition equality individualized determinations frustrate purposes 60 characteristic predictable manner enactment, balance desire correlate precise correlation unattainable realities situation. No contend, example, participants, 62 disability-insurance amount, needy. Nonetheless employ factors determinants eligibility. 402(b)(1) V). overinclusiveness categorizations cases, tolerable Solomonic. attempted distribute funds accordance alleviate very procedural leviathan consuming case-by-case 61 display earmarks origins oft-repeated reconsideration expansion groups. As originally enacted 1935, 623. additional family, widow's larger permissible All things considered, 1939 reflect elderly groups, two, plight especially severe.2 plurality's statement '(t)here ..' 215. neither doubt favorable treatment, 1, saw prevalent throughout characteristically high level new With exception, sections additionally or, enactment obviously properly able numbers qualification marriage wage-earning wife. Proof adopted suitable means independent incomes, preserving shown apart brought 63 Subsequent altered predictably direction coverage3 basic remained unchanged. pair after passing spouse. indicated increase stand 100% 50% spouses,4 separately losing spouse's account. living loses receipt lose 100%.5 implicit practical point, ante, 212-217, absence prerequisite resting convenience,' frequent enough waiving entirely. differ necessarily invalidates classification. Our inquiry go further. aimed distributing weigh good heavily side contexts. afforded choosing administrator decedent's estate, effectiveness 'convenience' certainty. reason, errs dispatching incantation convenience.' further advanced this, claimed injury 65 Whatever needs, would, complaint chosen refrained 'A legislature address 'one step time,' 'select phase apply neglecting Williamson Lee Optical 348 489, 75 461, 465, 99 L.Ed. 563 (1955).' ,Jefferson Hackney, 535, 546, 1724, 1731, 285 487, 1162, 491 Geduldig Aiello, 484, 2485, 2491, 256 (1974); Lindsley Natural Carbonic Gas 220 61, 337, 369 (1911). Any alleged impropriety giving purpose, underlying facts, offensive cases. 66 analogue last plaintiffs children's illegitimates,6 demand lived contributed prior After stating legitimacy 'our exacting scrutiny,' 506, 2763, 'at impermissibly discriminatory parent immediate need.' 507, 2763. waiver others, reasoning: 67 'The appellees' obvious renders benefit-recipients incrementally overinclusive, presumptive although permissible, likelihood 68 'Congress' adopting convenience. unwilling assume child readily documented birth, existence paternity decree, continued avoid number where objectively probable. functions, approximate, mirror, adjudication show, equivalence bounds substantiality tolerated applicable scrutiny. 2471, 69 'Applying principles, reasonable design parent's death.' 508-509, 510, 2763-2764. 70 us. surrogate others because, view, administratively counterproductive. Here belief benefits.7 71 Perhaps asserted 'heightened scrutiny' rooted unfair 684-688, 1769-1771, respective two. concludes "of employment." 206. 72 tool anything. urged redounding real doubtless contributions marital community helped acquisition being disparately taxed. 73 Since nature, 1436 (1960), creating part husband. gotten all. more, chosen, give 74 Viewed recipient distinguishable previously struck down. aspect children$'s allow children8 born onset disability. Other disabled. Finding worker, offended statute's opportunity themselves proper apparent care minor benefit, right. made, parallel position. single stay home 648-649, down fathers situated. defect conclusive exception benefited class, sex, contravention personal care. plausible objective thwarted underinclusiveness beneficiaries. 76 differs done. assessing propriety allocation evaluated unlike personnel allowances account marriage, unavailable except got effectively effort. true survivors done, comparative evaluating V squeezed cognizable 'discrimination' favors Quite scarcely improper formulate 'up-or-out' rules taking differences employment opportunities grant depressed plight. explicitly $500 VI 78 'overinclusive' whereas demonstrate Because overinclusion justifiable, upholding it. explainable measure ameliorate condition reverse Title 402(f)(1) pertinent part, provides: individual fully individual, '(A) remarried, '(B)(i) attained 60, (ii) disability ., '(C) filed '(D)(i) month died, began date and, '(E) 'shall Compare 402(e)(1) provides, part: married, '(C)(i) '(D) 402(c)(1)(C), applying benefits; 402(b). uniformly unconstitutional. Abbott Civ. C74-194 (N.D.Ohio, Feb. 1976), appeal docketed sub nom. Califano Abbott, 75-1643 (husband's benefits); Coffin 400 953 (D.C.1975) (three-judge court), Coffin, 75-791 (both Jablon 399 118 (Md.1975) Jablon, 75-739 Silbowitz 862 (S.D.Fla.1975) Silbowitz, 75-712 benefits). Kalinav. Railroad Retirement Bd., 541 Reporter, 2nd 1204 (C.A.6 1976) (spouse's annuity 231a(c)(3)(ii) V)). pursue application, concedes failure requirement, review futile initial 'final' jurisdiction 405(g). 764-767, 2466-2467, satisfied three times earned. According 25: 'As percent dependency) test.' test, budget, plus share. elaborate descriptions calculation, Regulations 404.350 (1976); Claims Manual, 2625, 2628. 25-26, 14; Appellee 7. dissent maintains sentence 'overstates relevance' answer propositions namely, surviving, insured, spouses; reliance empirically supportable; woman pronounced applies. 402(b), (c)(1)(C) situation, herself living, (during career) him,' 309 (E.D.N.Y.1975) (opinion below), tangible unit remains part. See, e.g., (1939), accompanying bill beyond himself. emphasizes 2; 23; Tr. Oral Arg. event, discriminations 'serve (are not) appellant, supports conclusion. Ballard discernible redressing society's longstanding 198 6, 457. mere shield protects scheme.' remedial Part IV-B, infra. advantaging wrongs compounds penalizing 'who support.' non-gender-based discriminations. weed collusive marriages nine months' duration longer ones ground: 'While limitation 'under-inclusive' 'over-inclusive,' widely response interests economy terms.' 776, 2472. Yet inadequate 690, 1772, 509-510, 2764, brief. Jurisdictional Statement, 11, rationality 'extending dependency.' extent system, worker. 414, 415 nn. inclusion category, 402 irrelevant 615, 74th (1935). Old-age 402(a) V); spouse, alive, (c), 402(e), (f), (g); 402(d); parents, 402(h). Dependency parents' 402(h)(1)(B); 402(d)(1)(C); 402(c) (1)(C); (Certain 'deemed' 402(d)(3). accurate pass 657 (1976).) essentially amounted 1/2% covered, pension. 203, remarks indicates orphans dependents, finding Final Hearings Means, (1939): inadequacy early marked annuitant wife.' excerpts discussion 644 13, 1231. proceeded casually accepted' stereotype controlled 514, 655, (Rehnquist, result). FICA involve Dependent sexes eligible; also, ineligible retirement depends sex: 75% male. Similarly, decedent's, 201-202, 1. defined once applicant. several potential meet. easy 77% work. (See 238 7.) 3,546,000 (This figure include 'dually entitled' accounts.) Task Force Adapting Era (prepared Special Aging, 94th 84) (Comm. Print 1975). Using estimate, 354,600, informs average yearly $2,213. 5A. total $784,729,800 Calculations sources 270,100 receives $1,168, $315,476,800. approximately $1 billion year. concede 22. 1957 Widow's 'receiving regular toward court ordered 209(n), 1378. retained 216(h)(2), 511. dependency; deleted 216(h), 518. affirmative evidence test. noteworthy elsewhere 'deemed dependent' circumstances. 202(d)(3), stated IV-B BRENNAN's opinion, Secretary's alternative poverty unacceptable. concerning vis-a$-vis breadth Act: '(C)hildren limited circumstances 643-644, disqualification woman's father, 202(c)(4), 1365, particularly reconcile theory motive mention deserved 216. feature state broad, vague 'dependent' harsh arithmetic standard. serves appellee windfall favor. assurance broad mind classified dependents. mind, 1905, untenable. actual, choice upheld, reserve recognized literature century. Bumble ridiculed disclaimed misconduct. disclaimer known, inappropriate quote passage: "It Bumble. it,' Bumble; looking round ascertain partner left room. "That excuse,' replied Brownlow. occasion trinkets, guilty eye law; supposes acts direction.' "If that,' Bumble, squeezing hat emphatically hands, ass idiot. that's law, law's bachelor; worst wish opened experience experience." C. Dickens, Adventures Oliver Twist, chapter LI (emphasis added). members, unique conditions attaching each. 'Wife's Benefits' participant's 65, (or 1378) filing amount. 'Widow's three-fourths unmarried him) addition, Current failing 'Child's another amended statute. 'Parent's Benefit' 'Lump-Sun Death Payments.' 1364-1367. drafted group. follows: day farm economy, thereby assured comfort declining years, passed proportion population. devastating country. 'Women live men. Wives often younger Consequently, probabilities outlive supplemented life behalf fall considerably security.' 31-32 Likewise, (to benefits) 'groups greatest.' suppose perception persists today proportions poor Four 52% Of alone, 33.4% below line. Era, prepared 37, 68-69 Among changes lowering eligibility, elimination, cohabitation, beneficiary's benefit. Also, divorced years. recently unanimously section's imposition minimum-age undivorced caring De Castro, 181, 431, 389 402(b)(2), (c)(3), (e)(2)(A), (f)(3)(A) 402(b)(1)(D), (c)(1)(D), (e)(1)(D), (f)(i)(E) Notwithstanding illegitimacy, inherit intestacy laws; decedent went through ceremony valid nonobvious legal defect; writing; decreed his. 402(d), 416(h) statistical indicating economically justifiable few costs application. couples population, 43% 1974 labor Bureau Census, Statistical Portrait (Table 10-9) (Apr. 43%, median 26.1% income. Ibid. 10-10). 25% maximum statutorily follows whole roughly sum work, (since definition, 26.1%). calculation leads 78.5% (57% $ 21.5%) otherwise higher. Whereas 56%, 23%. (These derived data appearing 27-28 (Tables 7-1, 7-2)). habits Even (an unlikelihood probability support), 23% (43% 10-9).) 88.5% remaining do. nine-tenths one-tenth incidence low incurred screening 1970, 2.5% KF105 F3 Linden, Women: Demographic, Economic Presentation 1% (.25 .43 .0108).

Classification Label: 1