Two federal judges have thrown out lawsuits brought by investors who claimed that research from analysts at four of Wall Street's biggest firms caused them to lose money in the stock market.
The decisions could have broad implications for legal battles related to the bursting of the 1990s stock market bubble and efforts to assign blame for money lost.
In one ruling, US District Judge Milton Pollack granted a motion by Merrill Lynch to dismiss class-action complaints related to past Merrill research of online advertising company 24/7 Real Media and software maker Interliant.
Merrill helped take those companies public during the bull market and its former star Internet analyst, Mr Henry Blodget, periodically issued research about them. The plaintiffs had claimed Merrill's research was overly optimistic and responsible for their losses.
In the other ruling, handed down by US District Judge Harold Baer, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and the Credit Suisse First Boston won a motion to dismiss a case that blamed them for losses in shares of Covad Communications.
Shares of each of the once-high-flying companies at the heart of the investors' lawsuits now trade for less than $1.00.
In a 43-page decision, Judge Pollack said he was "utterly unconvinced" of the merits of the plaintiffs' case, saying they lost their money "fair and square."
"The record clearly reveals that plaintiffs were among the high-risk speculators who ... now hope to twist the federal securities laws into a scheme of cost-free speculators' insurance," Judge Pollack wrote in his decision.
Merrill still faces 25 class-action lawsuits related to its research on Internet stocks, according to a footnote in the document.