D. C. Catering Company, Inc., T/a Peking Palace et al., Appellants, v. Peking Restaurant, Inc., et al., Appellees, 230 F.2d 823 (D.C. Cir. 1956)
Annotate this CaseDecided January 19, 1956
Mr. Harry A. Finney, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Dennis Collins, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellants.
Mr. Ross O'Donoghue, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Bailey Walsh, Memphis, Tenn., was on the brief, for appellees.
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and BAZELON and FAHY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The District Court concluded that unfair competition resulted from appellants' use of the name "Peking Palace" for their new restaurant in view of appellees' long prior and continued use of the name "Peking Restaurant" for their restaurant located about twenty blocks away on the same street. This conclusion was based on a finding that the word "Peking," as used by appellees, is "not descriptive of a style of [Chinese] cooking," but instead is an "arbitrary or fanciful" designation which identifies appellees' restaurant to its patrons. The court also concluded that appellants had improperly used a fanciful name and secret recipe for soup which appellees had developed.
Since we think these conclusions are supported by the evidence and the law applicable thereto, we affirm the District Court's injunction prohibiting appellants from unfairly competing in the respects enumerated.
Affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
