Alex George, d/b/a/ High Country Club, Plaintiff and Appellant v. H.S.

Peterson, d/b/a High Country Inn Restaurant, d/b/a Peterson Realty

company, Defendant and Respondent
George v. Peterson, 671 P.2d 208 (Utah 1983)
Supreme Court of Utah
Procedural History:
Plaintiff is appealing the trial court ruling that was in favor of the
defendant. Ruling was that the plaintiff failed to show that the name
High Country was a geographical name and that the plaintiff failed to
prove that the name had a secondary meaning.
Statement of Facts:
Plaintiff owned a club that he named High Country Club. Defendant
owned an inn named High Country Inn. Around the same time both
parties opened restaurants named High Country Restaurant.
Issues:
Is the High Country name protectable or is it just a geographical name?
Had the name High Country developed a secondary meaning?
Had the plaintiffs business suffered because of the defendants
actions?
Rules of the case:
Using the case of North American Aircoach Systems, Inc. v. North
American Aviation, Inc., 231 F.2d 205 (9th Cir. Cal. 1955) it was shown
that even though it is a geographical name they had developed a
secondary meaning and the defendant was therefore infringing on the
plaintiffs trademark.
Through Budget Sys. v. Budget Loan & Fin. Plan, 12 Utah 2d 18 (Utah
1961) and
Security Title Ins. Agency v. Security Title Ins. Co., 15 Utah 2d 93 (Utah
1964) both cases show that if you can prove secondary meaning or
extensive marketing to promote brand.
Holding:
High Country name is not protectable. Also the High Country name has
not developed a secondary meaning.

Reasoning:
Following the North American Aircoach Systems v. North American
Aviation case the court ruled that such language is of public domain. To
trademark a name that is of geographical origin the plaintiff must show
that through their efforts and expenditures they have developed a
reputation and good will for its business and its products, so that such
a name has come to mean in the minds of the general public, that
particular business and its products. On testimony the plaintiff failed to
show that he had done so, showing that he had only spent $1500 on a
sign reading High Country Restaurant and had advertised the
restaurant in the Yellow Pages of the phone book
Following the Budget Sys. v. Budget Loan & Fin. Plan the court ruled
that High Country Club had not developed a secondary meaning and
that mere length of a name being in use does not establish a
secondary meaning. Along with failing to show that the name had
established secondary meaning the plaintiff failed to show that
confusion had resulted from the similarity in names.
Judgment:
The ruling was affirmed. The defendant did not need to change the
name to their restaurant.