Barboza v. California Ass'n of Professional Firefighters, 799 F.3d 1257

Plaintiff David Barboza, a retired firefighter, sued CAPF (California Association of Professional Firefighters), CAISI (administrator), and board members alleging ERISA fiduciary breaches related to a long‑term disability Plan.
The Plan is funded solely by participant contributions, administered day‑to‑day by CAISI under an administrative services agreement, and its assets are held in CAPF’s name in a Wells Fargo account. CAISI signs checks on that account and pays benefits and its own fees from it.
District court granted defendants summary judgment on the §1103(a) “hold in trust” claim and on the self‑dealing claim, but granted Barboza summary judgment on failure to provide a summary annual report. Parties cross‑appealed.
On appeal the Ninth Circuit examined three ERISA provisions: the §1103(a) hold‑in‑trust requirement, §1106 prohibitions on fiduciary self‑dealing, and the summary annual report regulation (29 C.F.R. §2520.104b‑10(a)).
Court found the Plan Instrument names CAPF as holding legal title and creating a trust relationship for participants (satisfying §1103(a)); held CAISI’s paying its own fees from plan assets violated §1106(b)(1); and found the Plan exempt from the summary annual report requirement as a totally unfunded/dues‑financed welfare plan.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Plan satisfies ERISA §1103(a) hold‑in‑trust requirement	Barboza: CAPF (a corporation) is not a trust; delegation to CAISI shows lack of exclusive control so §1103(a) violated	Defendants: Plan Instrument names CAPF to hold assets for participants; written instrument suffices despite corporate form and delegation to an administrator	Held: Affirmed for defendants — Plan Instrument creates a common‑law trust relationship and names CAPF as trustee, satisfying §1103(a)
Whether CAISI’s payment of its own fees from plan assets violated §1106(b)(1) (self‑dealing)	Barboza: CAISI is a fiduciary and paying itself from plan funds is per se prohibited self‑dealing	Defendants: CAISI was authorized by the administrative services agreement to pay its fees from the account	Held: Reversed for defendants — CAISI’s payments from plan assets constitute a per se §1106(b)(1) violation; §1108(c)(2) compensation safe harbor unavailable
Whether defendants breached duty by failing to provide a summary annual report under 29 C.F.R. §2520.104b‑10(a)	Barboza: Plan required to distribute summary annual reports to participants	Defendants: Plan is a totally unfunded/dues‑financed welfare plan maintained by an employee organization and thus exempt	Held: Reversed for plaintiff — Plan is exempt (totally unfunded / dues‑financed welfare plan), so no summary annual report required

Varity Corp. v. Howe, 516 U.S. 489 (1996) (ERISA incorporates common‑law trust principles for fiduciary duties)
United States v. Lazarenko, 564 F.3d 1026 (9th Cir. 2009) (apply ordinary/common‑law meanings when statute silent)
United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206 (1983) (common‑law trust elements can establish a trust absent explicit statutory language)
Patelco Credit Union v. Sahni, 262 F.3d 897 (9th Cir. 2001) (paying oneself from welfare plan assets is a per se §1106(b)(1) violation)
Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006) (limits Auer deference where regulation parrots statute)
Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997) (deference to agency interpretation of its regulations in certain circumstances)