Court Opinion

ID: 9817968
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 05:06:53.177158+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:11.817354
License: Public Domain

NOONAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
By the principles of law distinguishing trusteeship and agency, Vanguard was an agent, not a trustee. The restrictions on Vanguard’s power of investment imposed by the Internal Revenue Code 26 U.S.C. § 408(a), however, infringe on Blankenship’s control as does the provision in the same statute that the balance of his account be nonforfeitable. If Vanguard were his agent, Blankenship would be free to invest the account as he chose, and he could not confer upon it a nonforfeitable status. Because of these peculiarities of the position of Vanguard — peculiarities owed to the Internal Revenue Code — Vanguard does not completely meet the criteria of agency, and, therefore, Blankenship prevails in this case.