Eli Lilly & Co. v. Sav-On-Drugs, Inc.
366 U.S. 276 · Decided May 22, 1961 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Sav-On-Drugs, Inc. was decided on May 22, 1961 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Hugo L. Black wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “State or local business regulation” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 366 U.S. 276 · 81 S. Ct. 1316 · 6 L. Ed. 2d 288 · 1961 U.S. LEXIS 2115
- Docket number
- 203
- Decided
- May 22, 1961
- Argued
- March 20, 1961
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- Hugo L. Black
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- State or local business regulation
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Dissent | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Charles E. Whittaker | Dissent | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Dissent |
Full case caption
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Sav-On-Drugs, Inc., et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1960-093, docket 1960-093-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “State or local business regulation”
- Martin v. Walton
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Oklahoma Retail Grocers Association, Inc.
- Ferguson v. SkrupaAltered precedent
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul
- Service Storage & Transfer Co., Inc. v. Virginia
- Polar Ice Cream & Creamery Co. v. AndrewsLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- Alaska v. Arctic Maid
- Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City of Detroit
- Central Railroad Company of Pennsylvania v. PennsylvaniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Scripto, Inc. v. Carson
- State Tax Commission of Utah v. Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co.
- Colorado Anti-Discrimination Commission v. Continental Air Lines, Inc.
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Michalic v. Cleveland Tankers, Inc.
- Waterman Steamship Corp. v. Dugan & McNamara, Inc.
- New York v. Henagan
- Thomas v. Virginia
- United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co.
- Lewis v. Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error