Without formally overruling the Great-West v. Knudson decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plan fiduciary could seek subrogation under Section 502(a)(3). Relying on a 1914 decision, the court found that the claim was “equitable” because “the ‘Acts of Third Parties’ provision in the Sereboffs’ plan specifically identified a particular fund, distinct from the Sereboffs’ general assets – ‘all recoveries from a third party (whether by lawsuit, settlement, or otherwise) – and a particular share of that fund to which Mid Atlantic was entitled – ‘that portion of the total recovery which is due Mid Atlantic for benefits paid.’  Like Street and Alexander in Barnes, therefore, Mid Atlantic could rely on a ‘familiar rule of equity’ to collect for the medical bills it had paid on the Sereboffs’ behalf.” Because the fiduciaries in this case sought an equitable lien “by agreement” as opposed to “equitable restitution” (as was sought in Great-West), satisfaction of the tracing rules outlined in the Great-West decision was not required. See Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic, 126 S.Ct. 1869 (2006).