ELI LILLY CO. v. SAV-ON-DRUGS, INC, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Melvin P. Antell argued the cause for the appellant (
Lorentz Stamler, attorneys). Mr. Warren E. Dunn argued the cause for the defendant-respondent (
Lum, Fairlie Foster, attorneys
Mr. Claus Motulsky, of the New York bar, on the brief). Mr. Murry Brochin argued the cause for the State of New Jersey, intervenor ( Mr. David D. Furman, attorney).

Judges

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Melvin P. Antell argued the cause for the appellant (
Lorentz Stamler, attorneys). Mr. Warren E. Dunn argued the cause for the defendant-respondent (
Lum, Fairlie Foster, attorneys
Mr. Claus Motulsky, of the New York bar, on the brief). Mr. Murry Brochin argued the cause for the State of New Jersey, intervenor ( Mr. David D. Furman, attorney).

Judges

See more information ...

Smart Summary

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF INDIANA,PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. SAV-ON-DRUGS, INC., A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OFNEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Scherer in the court below.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices BURLING, JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR and SCHETTINO — 6.

For reversal — Justice HALL — 1.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.