Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The fiduciary rule was overturned in March by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. ... Merrill Lynch, along with JPMorgan Chase & Co, effectively banned brokerage retirement accounts last June ...
Market Rules to Remember is a list of ten cautionary rules for investors that was written in 1998 by the then-retired Chief Market Analyst at Merrill Lynch, Bob Farrell. The rules became iconic on Wall Street and are frequently reprinted in leading financial advisory publications.
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit, 547 U.S. 71 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the extent to which state law securities fraud class action claims were preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA).
Later that day, Merrill Lynch was sold to Bank of America for 0.8595 share of Bank of America common stock for each Merrill Lynch common share, or about $50 billion or $29 per share. [ 50 ] [ 51 ] This price represented a 70.1% premium over the September 12 closing price or a 38% premium over Merrill's book value of $21 a share, [ 52 ] but also ...
Bank of America Merrill Lynch has made some key changes to its US 1 List, which is its collection of best investment ideas drawn from its universe of Buy-rated stocks from its fundamental equity ...
A U.S. judge has blocked a Department of Labor rule from taking effect that would have expanded the types of retirement advisers who are considered fiduciaries, finding the rule was arbitrary and ...
The company was founded on January 6, 1914, when Charles E. Merrill opened Charles E. Merrill & Co. for business at 7 Wall Street in New York City. [11] A few months later, Merrill's friend, Edmund C. Lynch, joined him, and in 1915 the name was officially changed to Merrill, Lynch & Co. [12] At that time, the firm's name included a comma between Merrill and Lynch, which was dropped in 1938. [13]
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, 8–0, that the jurisdictional test established by §27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is the same as 28 U.S.C. § 1331's [1] test for deciding if a case "arises under" a federal law.