1. the $200 Million Subordination Merrill Had Submitted to the NYSE
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
DEC 3 0 1991 ROBERT L. HOECKER Clerk
Appellate Case: 90-1243 Document: 01019337108 Date Filed: 12/30/1991 Page: 1 FIL~D United States Co~ ~f Ap:;>eals Tenth C1rcmt PUBLISH DEC 3 0 1991 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ROBERT L. HOECKER FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk IN RE: KAISER STEEL CORPORATION, ) ) Debtor. ) ) ) --------------- ) KAISER STEEL CORPORATION; KAISER STEEL RESOURCES, ) INC., formerly known as Kaiser Steel Corporation, ) ) Plaintiffs-Appellants, ) Case No. ) 90-1243 v. ) ) PEARL BREWING COMPANY; FALSTAFF BREWING COMPANY; ) OPPENHEIMER & CO. INC.; JOSEPHTHAL & CO., Josephthal ) & Co. Incorporated; THE HILLMAN CO., INDIVIDUALLY AND ) AS TRUSTEE FOR THE N.M.U. PENSION TRUST; HERZFELD & ) STERN; HERZFELD & STERN INC., now known as JII ) Securities, Inc.; GOLDMAN SACHS & CO.; A.G. BECKER ) PARIBES INC., now known as Merrill Lynch Money Market, ) Inc.; A.G. EDWARDS & SONS, INC.; ALPINE ASSOCIATES; ) ASIEL & CO.; BANKERS TRUST COMPANY; BARCLAY'S BANK ) INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; BEAR STEARNS & CO., ) individually and as custodian for the IRA ACCOUNT OF ) ROBERT W. SABES; BRADFORD TRUST CO.; COWEN & CO.; ) CROCKER NATIONAL BANK; DAIN BOSWORTH, INC.; DILLON ) READ & CO., INC., individually and as General Partner ) of B/DR ARBITRAGE FUND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; DOFT & ) CO., INC.; DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT, INC.; EASTON & CO.; ) EDWARD A. VINER & CO., INC., now known as Fahnestock & ) Co.; EDWARD D. JONES & CO.; ENGLER & BUDD COMPANY; ) EPPLER, GUERIN & TURNER, INC.; ERNST & COMPANY; EVANS ) & CO., INC.; FIFTH THIRD BANK; FIRST KENTUCKY TRUST ) COMPANY; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC.; -
ARTICLE:Liability of Broker-Dealers for Unsuitable Recommendations to Institutional Investors 2001
ARTICLE:Liability of Broker-Dealers for Unsuitable Recommendations to Institutional Investors 2001 Reporter 2001 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 1493 Length: 32348 words Author: Norman S. Poser* * Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School. A.B., LL.B., Harvard University. The work of my research assistants, Todd Doyle, Luke Fitzgerald, and Tracey Seraydarian, is gratefully acknowledged. I thank Professors James Fanto, Roberta Karmel, Therese Maynard, Arthur Pinto, Susan Poser, and William Wang for their helpful comments and suggestions. I am solely responsible, however, for the views expressed in this article. I also thank Brooklyn Law School and Dean Joan G. Wexler for the assistance provided to me through a Summer Research Stipend. LexisNexis Summary … According to the reasoning of these critics, the institutional investor, not the broker-dealer who knowingly or recklessly recommends an unsuitable security to the investor, should bear the responsibility for the recommendation if it goes bad. … There is no single definition of the term "institution," "institutional investor," or "institutional customer. … The California Court of Appeals has held that a broker's unsuitable recommendation to an institutional customer may be a breach of fiduciary duty, even if the account is nondiscretionary and even if the customer's representative tells the broker that he wishes to engage in transactions that would be unsuitable for the institution. … Other courts and arbitrators have agreed that a broker's unsuitable recommendation to an institutional investor constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty. … It may be insufficient for a broker-dealer to rely on what he is told by a institutional customer's financial officer or other representative. -
Investment Banking and Secondary Markets
Lecture 17: Investment Banking and Secondary Markets Economics 252, Spring 2008 Prof. Robert Shiller, Yale University Glass-Steagall Act 1933 • The modern concept of “Investment Bank” was created in the Glass-Steagall act (Banking Act of 1933). Glass Steagall separated commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies. • Carter Glass, Senator from Virginia, believed that commercial banks securities operations had contributed to the crash of 1929, that banks failed because of their securities operations, and that commercial banks used their knowledge as lenders to do insider trading of securities. Henry Paulson’s Proposal • Objectives-Based Regulation • Market stabililization Regulator • Prudential Financial Regulator • Business Conduct Regulator Paulson Continued • Federal Charter for insurance • Mortgage Origination Commission • SEC and CFTC merge • Merge OTS with OCC • Equip fed to monitor risks Investment Banks • Bulge bracket firms: First Boston, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Salomon Brothers, Lehman Brothers. • Traditionally were often partnerships, but partnership form is disappearing. Graham-Leach Act 1999 • President Clinton November 1999 signs Graham-Leach Bill which rescinded the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. • Consumer groups fought repeal of Glass- Steagall saying it would reduce privacy. Graham-Leach calls for a study of the issues of financial privacy Mergers among Commercial Banks, Investment Banks & Insurance Companies • Travelers’ Group (insurance) and Citicorp (commercial bank) 1998 to produce Citigroup, on anticipation that Glass-Steagall would be rescinded. Brokerage Smith Barney • Chase Manhattan Bank (commercial bank) acquires JP Morgan (investment bank) (2000) for $34.5 billion • UBS Switzerland buys Paine Webber (brokerage) 2000 • Credit Suisse buys Donaldson Lufkin Jenrette (investment bank) 2000 Lehman Brothers • Founded 1850, by Henry Lehman, a young German immigrant, and his brothers • Investment banking, private equity, private banking, etc. -
Glass-Steagall: Lest We Forget
Florida State University Law Review Volume 11 Issue 1 Article 5 Spring 1983 Glass-Steagall: Lest We Forget Lawrence F. Orbe III Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons Recommended Citation Lawrence F. Orbe III, Glass-Steagall: Lest We Forget, 11 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 163 (1983) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol11/iss1/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENTS GLASS-STEAGALL: LEST WE FORGET* LAWRENCE F. ORBE III I. INTRODUCTION In response to the Great Depression, federal legislation was en- acted to separate commercial and investment banking. However, the gradual sophistication of the banking industry and the creation of a plethora of new financial services offered by banking institu- tions have blurred this statutorily mandated division. This com- ment will trace the history of this legislation and delineate the principle actors responsible for its formulation. Next, an analogy * For earlier discussions of the Banking Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall Act) and related issues, see Beatty, What are the Legal Limits to the Expansion of National Bank Services? 86 BANKING L.J. 3 (1969); Beatty, The Incidental Powers of National Banks, 4 NAT'L BANKING REv. 263 (1967); Chase, The Emerging Financial Conglomerate: Liberalization of the Bank Holding Company Act, 60 GEO. L.J. 1225 (1972); Clark and Saunders, Glass- Steagall Revised: The Impact on Banks, Capital Markets, and the Small Investor, 97 BANKING L.J. -
The Reinsurance Company No One Wants Capital, GE Plans to Inject $1.8 Billion Into at ERC in 1999, the Company Sported Top GE’S Employers Re the Company
SM SCHIFFThe world’s most dangerous’ insuranceS publication November 22, 2002 Volume 14 • Number 17 INSURANCE OBSERVER The Reinsurance Company No One Wants capital, GE plans to inject $1.8 billion into at ERC in 1999, the company sported top GE’s Employers Re the company. (In the past five years ERC ratings from Best, S&P, and Moody’s. n early 1999 we placed a call to has upstreamed $2 billion in dividends to Those ratings are now history. As recently General Electric Capital—the parent its parent company.) GE also announced as July 10, Best affirmed ERC’s “A++” rat- of Employers Re (ERC), one of the a $4.5 billion infusion into GE Capital, ing, commenting on the company’s “ex- Iworld’s largest reinsurance organiza- whose balance sheet is stretched a bit cellent stand-alone capitalization; leading tions. We wanted to discuss a series of thin. (GE Capital has $260 billion of debt global market position, and prospective ERC ads that carried the famous GE logo outstanding.) long-term earnings capability.” On and that stated, in a variety of ways, that Until 2000, ERC had been reporting October 14, in light of the company’s ERC’s policies were “backed by” GE’s profits that did not upset Jack Welch’s gut. problems, Best revised its rating to “A+”, “resources” and “capital reserves.” Now it’s clear that ERC’s recent earn- expressing its “concerns regarding GE’s ERC’s ads were misleading and de- ings were an illusion resulting long-term commitment to GE Global ceptive because they gave the false im- from—we say this with all due re- [ERC’s direct parent] due to its pression that GE—as opposed to ERC— spect—honest mistakes made by bias against earnings volatility in- had financial responsibility for ERC’s GE stock-option holders trying to herent in GE Global’s non-life obligations. -
SEC News Digest, 07-09-1985
""~B~C new~.~~~lS~'~5t EXCHANGE COMMISt)ION CIVIL PROCEEDINGS SETTLEMENT REACHED BETWEEN SEC AND NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC. George G. Kundah1, Executive Director of the Commission, announced that on June 21 a settlement was reached between the Commission and Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., the Commission's former stenographic reporting contractor. On June 13, 1982, the Commis- sion issued a default against Gross for late and poor quality transcripts. Gross sub- sequently appealed the default to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and claimed entitlement to excess performance costs in the amount of $706,691.66. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Gross agrees to withdraw its claim for $706,691,661 the default is rescinded and the contract cancelled as of June 13, 19831 Gross agrees not to bid on any Commission contracts for reporting services for 15 years 1 and the Commission agrees to return $25,681 which it had drawn against Gross' performance bond, and $1,062.01 in incorrectly calculated discounts, plus interest on these amounts. (Appeals of Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., ASBCA NOS. 28776 and 29982, filed October 26, 1983 and September 7, 1984, respectively). (LR-10810) CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS . CHARLES J. ASCENZI INDICTED The washington Regional Office announced that on June 18 a grand jury in West Palm Beach, Florida named Charles J. Ascenzi of Silverdale, pennsylvania in a two-count indictment alleging wire fraud and the filing of false documents with a bank having deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The indictment alleges that Ascenzi fraudulently obtained $625,000 from the proceeds of an industrial revenue bond issue by the City of West Memphis, Arkansas for the benefit of Maphis Chapman Corporation of Arkansas. -
Lehman Brothers
Lehman Brothers Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (Pink Sheets: LEHMQ, former NYSE ticker symbol LEH) (pronounced / ˈliːm ə n/ ) was a global financial services firm which, until declaring bankruptcy in 2008, participated in business in investment banking, equity and fixed-income sales, research and trading, investment management, private equity, and private banking. It was a primary dealer in the U.S. Treasury securities market. Its primary subsidiaries included Lehman Brothers Inc., Neuberger Berman Inc., Aurora Loan Services, Inc., SIB Mortgage Corporation, Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB, Eagle Energy Partners, and the Crossroads Group. The firm's worldwide headquarters were in New York City, with regional headquarters in London and Tokyo, as well as offices located throughout the world. On September 15, 2008, the firm filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection following the massive exodus of most of its clients, drastic losses in its stock, and devaluation of its assets by credit rating agencies. The filing marked the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history.[2] The following day, the British bank Barclays announced its agreement to purchase, subject to regulatory approval, Lehman's North American investment-banking and trading divisions along with its New York headquarters building.[3][4] On September 20, 2008, a revised version of that agreement was approved by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge James M. Peck.[5] During the week of September 22, 2008, Nomura Holdings announced that it would acquire Lehman Brothers' franchise in the Asia Pacific region, including Japan, Hong Kong and Australia.[6] as well as, Lehman Brothers' investment banking and equities businesses in Europe and the Middle East. -
BUS 200 Group Project, Semester 2, 20057 March 2011 Business Organisation and Management
BUS 200 group project, semester 2, 20057 March 2011 business organisation and management (Photos: Entrance hall UBS headquarters in Basel, Aeschenvorstradt ; Counter hall UBS headquarters in Zurich, Bahnhofstrasse; UBS headquarters in Zurich, Bahnhofstrasse 45; UBS in Zurich, Paradeplatz) a glimpse of UBS Authors: Philipp Bircher 40808459 Meike Brünk 40594432 Valery Crottaz 40638626 Andreas Eiman 40811840 Anssi Ihaniemi 40794067 Executive summary As one of the leading wealth management companies in the world, a premier global invest- ment and asset management bank, UBS’ situation represents a good example of the chal- lenges an organization in the financial sector faces today. Beginning with a short outline of its historical roots, we try to shed light on UBS’ organizational culture. In this context it is cru- cial to understand that the values and norms within a company serve as guiding principles on a firm’s way to success. Thus, we analyse the values the organization promotes and discuss the implications this might have on its business. Many principles that are reflected in UBS’ organizational culture today have their roots in the bank’s constituting parts. Furthermore, the views on leadership and its emphasis on entrepreneurial thinking can only be fully understood if one takes into account the bank’s very diverse background which is a result of its history, its global business operations and its, in terms of culture and age, very heterogeneous work- force. Based on these facts and thoughts, we address the question of UBS’ strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats and summarize the organization’s situation in a SWOT Analysis. In terms of strengths, it turns out that the organization comes up with an efficient human re- source management, which focuses on satisfied employees, who are recognized by UBS as a key factor in the company’s success. -
Filed: New York County Clerk 06/04/2021 06:46 Pm Index No
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/04/2021 06:46 PM INDEX NO. 653623/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/04/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------X CRAIG J. MARSHAK, Index No.: EMIL ASSENTATO SUMMONS Plaintiffs Plaintiff designates New v. York County as the venue for trial based DIMAS LAW GROUP, P.C., upon the residence of JERELYN CREUTZ, SHR VENTURES LLC, and the defendants per STANLEY HUTTON RUMBOUGH CPLR § 503 Defendants ------------------------------------------------------------------X TO: Dimas Law Group 370 Lexington Avenue, Suite 505 New York, NY 10017 Jerelyn Creutz 17525 Rancho Del Rio Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 SHR Ventures LLC 370 Lexington Avenue, Suite 505 New York, NY 10017 Stanley Hutton Rumbough 14 Andrews Road Greenwich, CT 06830 TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the Complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer on plaintiffs’ attorney within 20 days after service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service, or within 30 days after service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York. In case of your failure to answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the Complaint. 1 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/04/2021 06:46 PM INDEX NO. 653623/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/04/2021 Dated: New York, New York June 4, 2021 GUZOV, LLC By: _____________________ Debra J. Guzov, Esq. David J. Kaplan, Esq. -
Behavior Modification
Providing Global Opportunities for the Risk-Aware Investor Behavior Modification Author Michael Lewis must feel like Yogi Berra with déjà vu all over again. In 1989, as the country was looking in the rear view mirror at a major market crash preceded by a decade of overindulgence, he published “Liar’s Poker.” His personal account of working at Salomon Brothers in the 1980’s told the tale of testosterone-charged bond traders and their relentless pursuit of money and power. The book became an instant classic on Wall Street, and somewhat of a playbook for aspiring Gordon Gekkos. He labeled that era to be a “rare and amazing glitch” in the history of earning a living. Today, as we read the emails and listen to the stories of deals constructed during the earlier years of the 2000’s, it seems that the “rare” money-making opportunity of the 1980’s was not so rare after all. As our legislators craft the details of financial reform, we think it is important that they focus not just on how to extricate ourselves from the next crisis, but on how to best prevent one. The main goal of this paper is to illuminate the central points of financial reform legislation now being debated in Congress. In order to do that, we must first address the important question: “What led us to this point?” Twenty years after “Liar’s Poker” Michael Lewis has published another book, “The Big Short,” in which he chronicles the accounts of a handful of investors who bet on and profited from the collapse of the subprime mortgage market. -
Two Harbors Announces Commercial Real Estate Team and $500 Million Initial Capital Allocation
Two Harbors Announces Commercial Real Estate Team and $500 Million Initial Capital Allocation New York, November 17, 2014 – Two Harbors Investment Corp. (NYSE: TWO) announced today that the parent company of its external manager, Pine River Capital Management L.P., has hired Jack Taylor to serve as Global Head of Commercial Real Estate and Stephen Alpart and Steven Plust to each serve as Managing Directors. Two Harbors also announced that it is planning an initial allocation of approximately $500 million of equity capital to a commercial real estate initiative. “The addition of Jack, Stephen and Steven to the Pine River team will enable Two Harbors to diversify our portfolio into commercial real estate assets,” stated Thomas Siering, Two Harbors’ President and Chief Executive Officer. “We believe the opportunity in the commercial real estate market is attractive and will drive total stockholder return over the long term.” Prior to joining Pine River in New York as Global Head of Commercial Real Estate, Mr. Taylor served as a Managing Director and Head of the Global Real Estate Finance business for Prudential Real Estate Investors. Mr. Taylor joined Prudential in May 2009 to establish the integrated global debt funds platform, and was responsible for strategic planning, product development, client relations and the investment activities of the group. Mr. Taylor was also a member of the Global Management Committee and chaired the Global Investment Committee for debt and equity. From 2003 to 2007, Mr. Taylor was a partner at Five Mile Capital Partners LLC and the portfolio manager for its flagship structured income fund. -
U.S. V. Hans Thomann Indictment (PDF)
" \ \ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INDICTMENT -v. - 12 Cr. HANS THOMANN, Defendant. 1:2CRIM212 --------- -- ------ -x COUNT ONE (Conspiracy) The Grand Jury charges: The Defendant and Associated Entities 1. At all times relevant to this Indictment, HANS 'L'HOMANN, the defendant, was a citizen and resident of Switzerland. 2. At all times relevant to this Indictment, UBS AG ("UBS"), a co-conspirator not named as a defendant herein, was a bank organized under the l,aws of Switzerland and was Switzerland's largest bank. At all times relevant to this Indictment, UBS owned and operated banking, investment banking, asset management, and stock brokerage businesses around the world, including in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere in the United States. 3. From in or about 1993 until at least in or about 2003, HANS THOMANN, the defendant, was a client advisor at UBS AG ("UBS II ). As a client advisor, THOMANN was a UBS client's primary interface with UBS. From in or about 2003 until at least in or about 2010, THOMANN was a client advisor at a series of asset management firms based in Switzerland (collectively, the "Swiss Asset Managersll ). Like UBS, the Swiss Asset Managers provided wealth management services to individuals around the world, including to u.S. taxpayers. Unlike UBS, however, the Swiss Asset Managers were not depository institutions. As a result, the Swiss Asset Managers arranged for the accounts of their clients to be maintained at various banks located in Switzerland. At all times relevant to this Indictment, the Swiss Asset Managers did not maintain any offices in the United States.