Mary Sue Estes v. Railroad Retirement Board

I agree with the majority’s statement of the law and its statement of the facts. Because the majority does not correctly apply that law to those facts, however, I must dissent.

The majority properly concludes that Ms. Estes is eligible for the disabled child’s annuity only if she was under a disability at the time of her twenty-second birthday. On or before that date, she must have been prevented by her condition from regularly engaging in substantial gainful activity. Based on the record as a whole, however, there is substantial evidence to support the RRB’s finding that Estes was not in fact…