# Pacificare Inc., Dba Pacificare of California v. Vernon D. Martin Sherrie Sue Martin, and Scott Douglas Martin, a Minor

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · September 1, 1994 · 34 F.3d 834

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9487293

## Case

- **Full name:** PACIFICARE INC., Dba Pacificare of California, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vernon D. MARTIN; Sherrie Sue Martin, Defendants, and Scott Douglas Martin, a Minor, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 1, 1994
- **Citations:** 34 F.3d 834; 94 Daily Journal DAR 12365; 18 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2146; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6692; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23803; 1994 WL 469874
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Norris
- **Judges:** Norris, Wiggins, O'Scannlain
- **Cited by:** 42 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9487293

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- applying the clearly erroneous standard to factual findings in this context

## Opinion text

NORRIS, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority that we should not create federal common law causes of action when plans fall under the purview of ERISA. The majority, however, fails to decide whether Pacificare has pleaded and proved a claim for equitable relief under 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3).
Although the district court was wrong in ruling that Pacificare had a federal common law claim, it was correct in characterizing Pacificare’s claim for reimbursement as an equitable claim for unjust enrichment. As such, the claim qualifies for equitable relief under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3).
The fact that Pacificare cited Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co. v. Waller, 906 F.2d 985 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 982 , 111 S.Ct. 512 , 112 L.Ed.2d 524 (1990), in its amended complaint as legal authority for bringing its equitable claim under the federal common law is irrelevant. A plaintiff is not required to cite legal authority in its complaint; it is only required to allege facts which would entitle it to relief under any legal theory. As long as Pacificare alleges and proves facts sufficient to establish an equitable claim for unjust enrichment under § 1132(a)(3), it is entitled to relief even though it mistakenly cited Provident Life rather than the statute as the legal basis for that relief.
Because Pacificare has pleaded and proved a claim for equitable relief for unjust enrichment under ERISA, summary judgment for Pacificare should be affirmed. See First Pacific Bancorp, Inc. v. Bro, 847 F.2d 542, 545 (9th Cir.1988) (summary judgment may be affirmed on ground not relied upon by the district court). I respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9487293. Public record. Not legal advice.