Dickler, Isaac S

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

fN THE MATTER OF ISAAC S. DICKLER l'COMPLAINT, FI:\DINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED'VIOLATION OF SUBSEC. (c) 01<' SEC. 2 OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED OCT. Hi, lOH, AS AMENDED \ . Docket 4:231. Cmnplalnt, Aug. 10, 1940-Decision, July 8, 19!,2 \Vhere nn individual, engaged In New York City as commission resident buyer ot fur garments for some 17 retailers located In Washington, Baltimore, San Francisco, and elsewhere In the United States, and' who advised him as to style, quality and size and the price they wlshed to pay for garments which they desired him to purchase, for shipment by sellers to them direct, and Who, in making such purchases through him from competing sellers In said · city, fur garment center of the United States, were in competition with many retailers who maintained buying offices thereinneceived and accepted from the sellers on such purchases a percentage, which Was usually five, of the agreed sales price on orders placed by said agent for them, and while he acted as their agent, buying representative or other intermediary:

lield, That such receipt of compensation in the form of commission or other- Wise by said Individual while acting as aforesaid constituted a violation of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton .Act, as amended by the· Roblnson- Patman .Act.

Mr. Edward S. Ragsdale for the Commission. . Mr. Alfred Mc'Oormack and Mr. Harmon Du;ncombe, of the firm of ' Crav-ath, DeGersdor££, Swaine & 'V'ood, of New York City, for respondent.

COMPLAINT 1 'rhe Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that the Party respondent named in the caption hereof, and hereinafter more Particularly designated and described, since June 19, 1936, has violated and is now violating the provisions of subsection (c) of Sec- ...__ ___ _ ~ 111PulaComplaintted amendmentIs publishedor complaintas amended,datednuncJunepro24, tunc,1942,byas Commissionfollows: order approving lVhereas, In connection with respondent's petltlen to file substitute answer In which he 11 ~QJnltted all the· material allegations or fact In the complaint, counsel for respondent Pntered into a stipulation with counsel for the Commission under date of May 27, 1942, t ro'VIdlng that the second paragraph of paragraph 1 or the complaint might be considered 0 , be amended ilb of the date of lssuanc& or said complaint to read: . \t~On such orders respondent generally receives from the sellers a commission ol. 5 percent. en retailers whom this respondent has represented subsequently place orders directly 111 ~ th fur garment manufacturers, the respondent seeks to, and on occasion does, secure 0111mi'sslons from the s<:>llers on such orders." nntl the Commission being fully advised In the premises, ~ 1'row, therefore, it ls ordered, That the amendment stipulated alld agreed to between Q011User be accepted and approved and the complaint herein be considered as amended accord!ingly.

GO FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Complaint tion 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act, approved June 19, 1936 (U.S. C., Title 15,,Sec. l3}, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges with respect thereto as follows: PARAGJ0.PH 1. Respondent, Isaac S. Dickler, is a commission resi· dent buyer with offices located at 370 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. Said respondent, in the course of his business as a commission resident buyer, acts as buying agent in the purchase of fur garments for and in behalf of approximately seventeen fur garment retaiiers located in the several States of the Uuited States ar.d in the District of Columbia. The manner of operation of respondent's business is that of receiving from various retail fur stores for "·hom he acts as agent, requests, orders, or requisitions to purchase fur garments upon general specifications as to size, style, quality and price. 'When such orders ure received by respondent he contacts various fur ~garment manufacturers and places the order at the most advantageous price from the standpoint of the buyer. Generally the manufacturer ships the fur garments so purchased direct to the retailer-purchaser, al· though in some instances delivery is arrested to permit inspection of the garments by respondent at respondent's place of business. On such orders respondent generally receives from the sellers a commission of 5 percent. When retailers whom this respondent has represented subsequently place orders directly with·· fur garment manufacturers, the ,respondent seeks to, and on occnsion does, secure commissions from the sellers on such orders. . New York City is the center of the fur garment industry in the United States, and fur garment retailers located in States of the United States other than the State of New York undergo expenditure in purchasing fur garments in the New York market. Many of such retail buyers maintain in NewYork City buying offices. Such buying offices are maintained and the· personnel compensated by such retail purchasers and not by the fur ·garment ·manufacturers. Retailers purchasing through commission buyers are generally competitively engageil with retailers who purchase through buyers who. are corn· pensated by the retailers. employing them. , PAn. 2. In the course and conduct of his business, respondent places . orders for fur garments with manufacturers located in New York City on behalf of retailers located in Washington, D, C;, Baltimore, Md., San Frl\_ncisco, Calif., and elsewhere throughout the United States, pursuant to which fur garments are shipped and caused to be trans· ported by said sellers from New York, N.Y., into and through various States of the United States to their respective customers. PAn.~. In the course of the purchasing transactions by the respond· rnt. nR set forth herein, sellers have, since J.une 19, 193.6, transmitted, ISAAC S. DICKLER 61 Findings Paid, and delivered and do transmit, pay and deliver, to said respond· ent commissions, the same being a certain percentage of the sales ·Price agreed upon between eiteh of such sellers and the respondent on the orders for merchandise placed by the respondent for his princi· pals; and said respondent since June 19, 1936, has received and ac- <'epted~ and is receiving and accepting, such commissions on purchases f)f merchandise by retail buyers in whose behalf said respondent has been and is, in fact, acting.

PAR. 4. The foregoing acts and priwtices are in violation of sub· ·~ection (c) of Section, 2 of the Clayton Act as amended. REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS, AND ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of an act of Congress entitled "An act to supplement existing laws against unlawful restraints and monopo· lies and for other purposes," approved October 15, 1914 (the Clayton .Act), as amended by an act of Congress approved June 19, 1936 (the l{obinson-Patman Act) (U.S. C. Title 15, Sec. 13), the Federal Trade l;ommission on August 10, 1940, issued and subsequently served its · -complaint in this proceeding upon respondent Isaac S. Dickler, charg..: ing him with violation of the provisions of subsection (c) of Section 2 ·of said Clayton Act, as amended. After the issuance of said com· Plaint and the filing of respondent's answer, the Commission entered' its order granting respondent's motion for permission to withdraw ~aid answer and to substitute therefor an answer admitting all the lnaterial allegations of fact set forth in said complaint and waiving all intervening procedure and further hearing as to said facts. The respondent also waived oral argument and the filing of briefs. There- :tfter this proceeding regularly came mi for final hearing before the Commission on the said complaint and substitute answer, and the Commission having duly considered the same and. being now fully advised in the premises, makes this its findings as to the facts andjts ·conclusion drawn therefrom.

FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Isaac S. Dickler, an individual, is a -commission resident buyer of fur garments having his office and place ·of business at 370 Seventh A venue, New York, N. Y. PAR. 2. In the course and conduct of his aforesaid business, respondent, acting in behalf of retailers of fur garments located in various 'States of the United States other than the State of New York; places orders for fur garments with manufacturers of such merchandise located in New York, N. Y. Pursuant to such orders, fur garments ~09749m--4a--v~l.35----7 62 FE.DERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Findings 35F. T. C.

are caused to be transported by said sellers from New York City through and into various States of the United States to the locations of the respective purchasers.

PAR. 3. The center of the fu·r garment industry in the United States is in New York City and retailers of fur garments located throughout the United States purchase supplies of such merchandise in the New York City market. Respondent's busiiJess as a commission resident buyer consists of acting for and in behalf of and as agent for retailers in the purchase of supplies of fur garments from manufacturers thereof in New York City. Respondent has as cl5ents some 17 retailers of fur garments who have their places of business in 'Vashington, D. C., Baltimore, M:d., San Francisco, Cali£., and elsewhere in the United States. These retailers advise respondent as to the style, quality, and size of fur garments they desire him to purchase for them, and the ' price they wish to pay. Upon receipt of such requests or orders, respondent calls upon various mahufacturers of fur garments in the New York City market, inspects the merchandise they have for sale, and selects for his clients those garments which he considers the most ·advantageous purchase for them. 'Vhen orders so placed are filled, . the merchandise is shipped by the manufacturer direct to the retail buyer, although in some instances delivery is arrested to permit inspection of the garments by respondent at his place of business. On purchases made as aforesaid, respondent generally receives from the seller a commission of 5 percent. 'Vhen retailers whom respondent has represented subsequently place orders directly with fur garment manufacturers, the respondent seeks to and on occasion does secure commissions from the sellers.

l\fany retail dealers maintain buying offices in New York City for ·the selection and purchase of supplies of merchandise, including fur garments, in the New York City market, and such dealers bear the expense of maintaining and operating buying offices. Retail dealers wlio purchase thrpugh respondent or other commission resident buyers who secure their compensation from the sellers are generally competitively engaged with retail dealers who bear the expense of maintaining and compensating their own buying representatives. · .. PAR. 4. In the course of the transactions of purchase in commerce as above set forth, respondent since June 19, 193G, while acting as purch:1,sing agent for and in behalf of buyers of such merchandise in the manner described, has received and accepted from the sellers thereof as a brokerage or commission a certain percentage of the sales price agreed upon be~ween each of such sellers nnd the respondent on orders placed by the respondent for his principals. · ISAAC S. DICKLER 63 59 Order CONCLUSION From the aforesaid facts and circumstances the Commission concludes that respondent, Isaac S. Dickler, is engaged as agent, buying representative, or other intermediary in the purchase in commerce of ~ur garments from representative competitive sellers, and has acted ln fact for or in behalf of or under the direct or indirect control of the retail dealers for whom such purchases were made. 'Vhile acting as agent, buying representative; or other intermediary in making purchases as aforesaid, respondent received compensation in the form of , commissions or otherwise from competitive sellers from whom purchases of fur garments· were made, in violation of the provisions of subsection· (c) of Section 2 of "An act to supplement existing laws against unlawful restraints and monopolies and for other purposes," approved October 15, 1914 (the Clayton Act), as amended by an act of Congress approved June 19, 1936 (the_Robinson-Patman Act) (U. S.C. Title 15, Sec. 13). . ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST . This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Commis- Sion upon the complaint,of the Commission and the substitute answer of respondent, Isaacs. Dirkler, which answer admits all of the material allegations of fact set forth in said complaint to be true and waives all other intervening procedure aJ1.d further hearing as to said facts, and the Commission having made its findings as to the facts and conclusion herein that said respondent has violated the provisions of "An act to supplement existing laws against unlawful restraints and monopolies and for other purposes" approved October 15,1914 (the Clayton Act), as amended by an net of Congress approved June 10; 1936 (the Robin- 8011-Patman Act) (U.S. C. Title 15, Sec. 13). . It is ordered, That respondent, Isaacs. Diclder,· an individual, his agents, employees, and representatives, directly or through any corporate or other device in or in connection with the purchase o.f furs, fur ¥:trments, or other commodities in commerce, as commerce is defined ~11 ~he aforesaid Clayton ~ct, as amended, do forthwith cease and es1st from: "- . b U.eceiving or accepting directly or indirectly anything of value as rokerage, commission, OL' other compensation or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof from auy seller on or in connection with purch:\ses lnade from such seller (a) when such purchases are made for respondbllt'~ own account, or (b) when such purchases are ina de as agent or uymg representative of the purchaser, or (a) when in making such Order 35F. T.C.

purchases respondent is acting in fact for or in behalf, or is subject to the direct or indirect control, of the purchaser. It is further ordered, That the respond.ent shall, within 60 days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which he has complied with this order .

..

DAVID M. WEISS 65 Complaint