1. The adjective "casual," a descriptive word, is not such a word that may be exclusively appropriated as a trade name by a trader. 52 Am. Jur. 540-543, 54-57.
2. While the words "casual corner" may through long use in connection with the petitioner's business come to be understood by the public as designating the business of the petitioner, nevertheless the trade name "Singer's Casual Shop" is not so similar as to be such a colorable imitation of "Casual Corner" as would be confusing or misleading to the public, in the exercise of ordinary care, such as would cause reasonable and cautious persons to believe it was in any way connected with the petitioner's business and create unfair competition thereby. Hence, the court did not err in sustaining the general demurrers to the petition as amended and in dismissing the same. See Industrial Investment Co. v. Mitchell, 164 Ga. 437
(138 S. E. 908); First Federal Sav. & Loan Assn. v. First Finance & Thrift Corp., 207 Ga. 695
(64 S. E. 2d 58).
This is a case involving alleged trade-name infringement, in which the petitioner prays for an injunction against the defendant's use of a trade name containing the word "casual," the allegations, in substance, being that the petitioner has used and advertised in his business, a ladies' sportswear shop in the Buckhead area of Atlanta, for the past two years the word "casual" in his trade name "Casual Corner"; and that the names "casual corner" or "casual shop" have come to be recognized by the public in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area as the name of his business; that the defendant has begun to advertise his business, which is also a ladies' sportswear shop similar to the petitioner's, as "The Casual Shop," but after a written complaint from him changed it to "Singer's Casual Shop"; that the similarity of his trade name and that of the defendant constitutes an unfair trade practice in that it would be confusing and misleading and is confusing and misleading to the public; that the selection of "casual shop" by the defendant is for the fraudulent, illegal, and unfair purpose of capitalizing and reaping the benefits of the advertising, reputation, good will, and trade name of the petitioner; and that he will be irreparably, injured unless the defendant be enjoined from using a trade name so similar to his as to be confusing and misleading to the public.
General and special demurrers were filed to the petition and, after amendments were filed thereto, renewed, and additional demurrers were filed to the petition as thus amended. The court sustained the renewed general demurrers and dismissed the petition as amended, and the exception here is to that judgment.