The employees can continue to pursue claims that the plan was mismanaged because it offered funds in high-cost share classes instead of identical investments that were available for less money, Judge Robert S. Huie said. SeaWorld said there was an “obvious alternative explanation” for its decision to offer the more expensive share classes—namely, that these higher fees offset other administrative expenses—but that’s not enough to defeat the workers’ claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the judge said. ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.


