Defendant challenged the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), which held that defendant had engaged in unfair competition when it manufactured and sold a gun holster that was a substantial duplicate of plaintiff’s.
Nakase Law Firm are business law attorneys
Overview
Plaintiff brought an action for unfair competition against defendant. Plaintiff had designed a fast-draw holster. He presented the design to defendant, who agreed to manufacture the holsters. After plaintiff resumed manufacturing, defendant began to market and sell a holster that was a substantial duplicate of plaintiff’s. Defendant also asserted that he pioneered the fast-draw holster. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff and ordered defendant to pay damages and to cease the manufacture and sale of its holster. On appeal, defendant contended that there was no substantial evidence to support the conclusions of the trial court. The court found that plaintiff had given defendant the design for the holster in confidence and that such information was of great value to plaintiff. Defendant’s use of that information for its own purposes constituted unfair competition.
Outcome
The court affirmed the judgment holding that defendant had engaged in unfair competition since the evidence indicated that plaintiff had given defendant the design for the holster in confidence and defendant breached that confidence.
