Does BancBoston Now Charge, In the face of a JNJ retreat from a superior weapon? Is this a trend we have yet to anticipate, when studies prove racemic version can do harm, then the owner pulls racemic from a weak market, for legal liability reasons?
Lawyers, is the liability greater if the second isomer has been proven to be the cause of any harm?
"By Stephanie O'Brien,
CBS MarketWatch
Last Update: 5:50 PM ET Jun 10, 1999
NewsWatch
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- BancBoston Robertson Stephens on
Thursday cut earnings estimates for specialty-pharmaceuticals maker
Sepracor, due to recent partnerships and clinical data.
"We are lowering our earnings estimates on
Sepracor (SEPR: news, msgs) to reflect changes
primarily due to Johnson & Johnson's (JNJ: news,
msgs) decision not to co-promote the
(antihistamine) Norastemizole," said Donald Ellis,
an analyst at the investment firm, in a note to clients.
Ellis didn't elaborate on the clinical data in the
after-the-bell press release." |
