Evening Dress Guild, Inc

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

IN THE Matrer OF EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL.

COMPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OIJ' SEC. II OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT 26, 1914 Docket 4151. Complaint, Apr. l?2, 1942-Decision, Nov. 18, 1949 'Where eleven corporations, a partnership and an individual, membet:s of a corporate "Guild" (later dissolved), doing a substantial volume of the whole of the business-particularly in the metropolitan area surrounding r-.1ew .York City-of the manufacture rund interstate sale and distribution of Popular priced women's and misses' formal evening dt·esses in competition ~ with one another, except as below set forth, and with others; entered into, maintained, and carried out agreements and understandings between and among themselves to suppress competition in said business; and . •1 (n PUt·su:mce of said agreements, etc., and to make them etrective, concertedly- !) Organized said Guild to control and regulate their business; (2) Fi:x:ed and maintained prices and terms and conditions of sale in connec- (a tion with the marketing of their said merchandise; ) Attended meetings held ft•om time to time under the auspices of said Gulld, . at which the prices of their said merchandise to retail dealer customers ( Were increased; and 4) Aclopted also under said Guild auspices, trade practice rules forbidding certain trade deductions and allowances to their customers which they had there- () tofore permitted;

apacity, tendency and eflect of which agt·eements, etc., and acts performed in Pursuance thereof, were unreasonably to suppress and restrain competition in the sale and distribution of said articles of merchandise in commerce lJ.. and to deprive the public of the full benefit of comvetltiou therein: _eld, That said nets and practices, under the circumstances set forth, were all to the prejudice of the public, had a dangerous tendency to and did "ctually restrain and eliminate price competition in the sale and distribution of formal evening aresses in commerce; placed in their hands power to control and enhance prices; unreasonably restrained such commerce In formal evening dresses; and constituted unfair acts and practices in commerce and Unfair methods of competition therein.

fr. Geor[!e lV. Williams for the Commission. . l{ ifl'. Lawrence I. Gerber, of New York City, for Harry Goodman, ertnan Goodman, and Joseph Scafuri. · A/h. herman llaimes, of New York City, for Murray E. Gottesman, beyer Schatzberg, Jack Levy, Mike Reiter, Clover Dance Frocks, Inc., 11' ebonair Dance Frocks, Inc., Gaytime Frocks, Inc., Hollywood bortnals, Inc., Patio Dress Co., Inc., Penelope Frocks, Inc., Seville \'V~ess Manufacturing Co., Inc., Studio Dance Frocks, Inc., and S. Icha, Inc.

Complaint 37 F. T. C.

Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that the parties named in the caption hereof, and hereinafter particularly described, desig· nated and referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of section 5 of said act, and it appearing to the Commission that a pro· ceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues' its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Evening Dress Guild, Inc., hereinafter referred to as respondent "Guild," is a corporation, organized, exist· ing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 152 West Forty-second Street (at the office of attorney Harold Harmatz), New York, N.Y. . The following individuals are, or were within the time hereinafter mentioned, the acting officers of said respondent Guild and as such officers, and individually, are designated as respondents herein: Harry Goodman, acting president, 134 'Vest Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y.; Murray E. Gottesman, acting secretary (Studio Dance Frocks, Inc.), 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.; and Meyer Schatz· berg, acting treasurer (Clover Dance Frocks, Inc.), 1359 Broadway, New York,N. Y. . The following named individuals constitute the board of directors of said Guild, or were within the time hereinafter mentioned, and as such directors, and individually, are designated as re~pondents herein: Jack Levy ( Gaytime Frocks, Inc.), 1359 Broad way, New York, N. "f.; :Murray E. Gottesman (Studio Dance Frocks, Inc.), 1359 DroadwrtY' New York, N.Y.; and Mike Reiter (Seville Dress Manufacturing Co., Inc.), 134 West Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y. The membership of said respondent Guild is made up of numerous corporations, partnerships, firms and individuals, hereinafter referr~d to as respondent members, engaged in the manufacture, sale and dls" tribution of popular priced women's and misses'· formal evening' dresses.

PAR. 2. Respondent, Bouquet Formals, Inc., is a corporation, or· ganized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the la":5 of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of busi" ness at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y. . d Respondent, Clover Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organtze ' existing, and doing business under imd by virtue of the laws of the EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL. 577 575 Complaint State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y. · Respondent, Darling Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N. Y.

Respondent, Debonair Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its principal office and place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Gaytime Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the Ia ws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Hollywood Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

. Respondent, Judy Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existlng, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 134 ·west 'I'hirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y.

. Respondent, Patio Dress Co., Inc., is a corporation, organized, existlng, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 218 'Vest 'I'hirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Penelope Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, e:listing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal plitce of business at 4D1 Seventh A venue, New York, N.Y.

, Respondent, Seville Dress Manufacturing Co., Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, end doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 134 West Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N. Y. Respondent, Stucl.io Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, e:existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its oflice and principal place of business at 13!)9 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

. Respondent, Tango Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existlng, and doincr business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York,~ith its office and principal place of business at 134 West thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y.

578 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSON DECISIONS Complaint 37 F. T.C.

' Respondent, S. 'Vicha, Inc., is n corporation, organized, existing, ~nd doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Yor·k, with its office and principal place of business at 491 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. · Respondents, Harry Goodman and Herman Goodman, are individuals, trading under their own names as copartners, with their . office and principal place of business at 134: West Thirty -seventh Street, New York, N. Y.

Respondent, Joseph Scafuri, is an individual, trading under the fir~ name and style of Adorable Dance Frocks, with his office and principal place of business at 1357 Broadway, New York, N.Y. Respondent, Murray Oliphant, is an individual, with his office and principal place of business at 1385 Broadway, New York, N. Y. PAR. 3. Said respondent members at all times herein mentioned lutve been, and are now, engaged in the manufacture, sale and delivery of popular priced women's and misses' formal evening dresses, and <;Ie· livering the same to their customers in the various States of the United States, other than New York, the State of origin, and in the District of Columbia, whereby said respondents created and maintained, and still maintain, a constant and continuous current of commerce in said evening dresses, between the respondent members and the purchasers thereof, in, among and between the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia.

The volume of business done by respondent members constitutes a substantial portion of the whole of such business done by this industry, particularly in the metropolitan area surrounding Ne'" York City.

PAR. 4. Said respondent members are in competition with one ' another in the manufacture, sale and distribution of their said articles of mer~handise in the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia, except insofar as their said competitioll has been hindered, lessened or restrained, or potential competitioll among them forestalled, by the acts, practices, methods and policies of said respondents hereinafter set forth.

There are other corporations, partnerships, firms and individurtlS not affiliated with respondent Guild, and which are engaged in t!18 manufacture, sale and distribution of similar articles of merchandise in the area in which said respondents trade, in competition with one another, and with one or more of said member respondents, except insofar as such competition has been hindered, lessened and re· strained, or potential competition among them forestalled, by the said respondents' acts, practices, methods and policies hereinafter described.

EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL. 579 575 Complaint PAR. 5. Said respondents within the last two years, have entered into, maintained and carried out agreements, understandings, combi~ nations and conspiracies, between and am()ng themselves to suppress, hinder, and_lessen competition in the manufacture, sale, and delivery of said articles of merchandise in the course of said commerce, in, among, and between the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia.

Pursuant to, and in furtherance of, and to make effective said agreements, understandings, combinations and conspiracies, said respondent members and individuals have cooperatively, concertedly and collectively adopted, engaged in, and tcarried out, among others, ' the following methods, acts and practices: 1. Organized respondent Guild, as aforesaid, to control and regulate the business of manufacturing, selling and delivering the said articles of merchandise.

2. Fixed, established and maintained prices and the terms and conditions of sale in connection with the marketing of the respective lines of their said articles of merchandise, in the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia. 3. Attended meeti~gs held from time to time under the auspices of respondent Guild, at which the prices of said articles of merchandise lnanufactured or sold by respondent members, as aforesaid, were increased to retail dealer customers.

4. Adopted under the auspices of respondent Guild, trade practice rules forbidding certain trade deductions and allowances which had theretofore been permitted by said members to their customers. PAR. 6. The capacity, tendency, and effect of the aforesaid agreelnents, understandings, combinations and conspiracies and the lnethods, acts and practices and things done and performed by respondents in pursuance thereof are, and have been, to unreasonably lessen, suppress, and restrain competition in the manufacture, sale, and delivery of said articles of merchandise in the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia, and to deprive the purchasing, using, and consuming public of the advantage of competitive prices, terms, and conditions in connection with the purchase thereof, and other advantages which they would receive and enjoy under conditions of normal and unobstructed and free and fair competition in said trade and industry, and to otherwise operate as a restraint upon, obstruction and detriment to, the freedom of fair a.nd legitimate competition in such trade and industry; and parhcularly among the members of said Guild.

PAR. 7. The nets and practices of said respondents, ami the things done and performed by the_m, as herein alleged, are all to the prejudice Findings 37F. T. C.

of the public; have a dangerous tendency to hinder and prevent, and have actually hindered and prevented competition between and · ampng said member respondents in the manufacture, sale, and deli very of their said articles of merchandise in commerce, within the intent and meaning of section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act; and placed in member respondents the power to control and enhan~e prices and other terms and conditions in connection with the manu· facture, sale an: a delivery of their said articles of merchandise; have a dangerous tendency to create in member respondents a mo· nopoly in said articles o£ merchandise in said commerce; have un· reasonably restrained such commerce in their said articles of mer· chandise, and constitute unfair methods o£ competition and· unfair and deceptive acts or practices in commerce, within the intent and' meaning o£ section 5 o£ the Federal Trade Commission Act. REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS, AND ORDER Pursuant to the provisions o£ the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Federal Trade Commission, on the 22d day o£ April 1942, issued and subsequently served its complaint in this proceeding upon the above-named respondents charging them with the use o£ unfair methods o£ competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation o£ the provisions o£ section 5 uf said act. All of the above-named respondents, except the Evening Dress Guild, Inc., Darling Formals, Inc., Judy Formals, Inc., and Murray Oli· phant, filed admission answers admitting all material allegations of fact set forth in said complaint and waiving all intervening procedure and further hearing as to said facts. Thereafter, this proceeding regularly came on for final hearing ·before the Commission on the said complaint and said answers, and the Commission, having duly considered the matter and now being fully advised in the premises, finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public and makes this its findings as to the facts and its conclusion drawn therefrom. FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Evening Dress Guild, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "respondent Guild," was a corporation organized, exist· ing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 152 Wes~ Forty-second Street, New York, N.Y. Said respondent was dissolve and ceased doing business on September 14, 1942. Respondent, Harry Goodman, 134 ·west Thirty-seventh Street, ~e"W" York, N.Y., is an individual and was an officer of respondent Gu1Id, EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL. 581 S75 Findings having held the office of acting president during the times herein n1entioned.

Respondent, Murray E. Gottesman, 13i'i9 Broadway, New York, N". Y., is an individual and representative of Studio Dance Frocks, Inc., and was an officer and director of respondent Guild, having held the office of acting secretary during the times herein mentioned. Respondent, Meyer Schatzberg, 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y., is an individual and representative of Clover Dance Frocks, Inc., and ""as an officer of respondent G{iild, having held the office of acting, treasurer during the times herein mentioned. Respondents, Jack Levy, 1359 Broadway, New York, N. Y., an indh-idual and representative of Gaytime Frocks, Inc., and l\Iike Reiter, 13{ \Vest Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y., an individual and l·epresentative of Seville Dress Manufacturing Co., Inc., were directors of respondent Guild during the times herein mentioned. Respondent, Bouquet Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized~ existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the • State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 llroadwny, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Clover Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, e~isting, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

. Respondent, Debonair Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organlZed, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of . ~he State of New York, with its principal office and place of business t 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

:U.respondent, Gaytime Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, ~~Isting, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the ~;ate of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 59 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

:nf':pondent, Hollywood Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, ~~Isting, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the nte of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 13 59 Broadway, New York, N.Y. · e :U.e:'lPondent, Patio Dress Co., Inc., is a corporation, organized~ s~lshng, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the 2I~te of New York, with its office and principal place of business at U'\Vest Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N. Y. e~· e~pondent, Penelope Frocks, Inc., is a. corporation, organized, Stishng, and uoing'business under and by virtue of the laws of the 4:9~~ of New York, with its office and principal place of buisness at seventh Avenue,NewYork,N. Y. Findings 37F.T.O.

Respondent, Seville Dress Manufacturing Co., Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 134 West Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y. R~spondent, Studio Dance Frocks, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 1359 Broadway, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Tango Formals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, ex· isting, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place o£ business at 134 'Vest Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y. Respondent, S. 'Vicha, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business at 491 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y.

• Respondents, Harry Goodman and Herman Goodman, are individ· uals, trading under their own names as copartners, with their offices and principal place of business at 134 ·west Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N.Y.

Respondent, Joseph Scafuri, is an individual, trading under the firm name and style of Adorable Dance Frocks, with his office and principal place of business at 1357 Broadway, New York, N.Y. Respondent~ Darling Formals, Inc., was a corporation, organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business located at 1359 Broad· way, New York, N. Y. Said respondent was dissolved and ceased doing business on May 1, 1942.

Respondent, Judy Formals, Inc., was a corporation, organized and existing under and by virtue uf t:ke laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business lecated at 134 West Thirty-seventh Street, New York, N. Y. Saidrespondent was dis· solved and <;eased doing business on July 23, 1942. Respondent, Murray Olipha.nt, is an individual, with his office and principal place of business at 1395 Broadway, New York, N.Y. Said respondent never took any active part in the formation of respondent Guild and was never a member thereof.

The aforesaid respondents, Bouquet Formals, Inc., Clover Dance Frocks, Inc.,. Debonair Dance Frocks, Inc., Gaytime Frocks, Inc., Hollywood Fonnals, Inc., Patio Dress Co., Inc.; Penelope Frocks, Inc., Seville Dress Manufacturing Qo., Inc., Studio Dance Frocks, Inc., Tango Fonnals, Inc., S. Wicha, Inc., Harry Goodman and Jier· man Goodman, copartners, and J qseph Scafuri, trading as Adorable EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL. 583 575 Findings Dance· Frocks, were members of respondent Evening Dress Guild, lnc., and, for convenience, will hereinafter be referred to as "respondent members."

·Pan. 2. Respondent members are now, and have been, engaged .in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of popular priced women's 11nd misses' formal evening dresses. Said respondent members cause said formal evening ·dresses, when sold by them, to be transported from their respective places of business in the State of New York to the purchasers thereof located in various other States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Said respondent members lnaintain, and at all times mentioned herein have maintained, a ~ourse of trade in said formal eveiJ.ing dresses in commerce among and etween the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia.

'lhe volume of business done by respondent members constituted, and constitutes, a substantial portion of the whole of such business ?one by this industry, particularly in the metropolitan area surroundlng New York City.

P .An. 3. Said respondent members were, and are, in comp~tition with one another in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of said articles b~ merchandise in various States of the United States and in the h!Strict of Columbia, except inso~ar as their said competition hns t~en hindered, lessened, or restrained, or potential competition among . ern forestalled, by the acts, practices, methods, and policies of said lespondents hereinafter set forth. · n 'there are other corporations, partnerships, firms, and individuals mot affiliated with respondent Guild and which are engaged in the i manufacture, sale, and distribution of similar articles of merchandise : the area in which said respondent members trade, in competition e lth one another, and with one or more of said respondent members, 11t~ept insofar as such competition has been hindred, lessened, or re-p ralned, or potential competition among them forestalled, by the acts, rnctices, methods, and policies hereinafter described. tl PAn. 4. Said respondent members, within the two yen.rs preceding le filing of the comi?lnint, have entered into, maintained, and carried0 t"'ltt an-e.reements, until erst and'mgs, com b'matwns,· and conspiracies· · b eti· ee~ and among themselves to suppress, hinder, and lessen competitn°11 ln the manufacture, sale, and distribution of said articles of therchandise in the course of said commerce in, nmong, and between ;"arious States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia. 8.gr Ursuant, to and in furtherance of, and to make effective said l'e eernents, understandings, combinations, and conspiracies, said .s:Pondent members and individuals have cooperatively, concertedly, Order 37F.T.C.

and collectively adopted, engaged in, and carried out, among other things, the following methods, acts, and practices: 1. Organized respondent Guild to control and regulate the b].lsiness of manufacturing, selling, and delivering the said articles of merchandise. · · 2. Fixed, established, and maintained prices and the terms and conditions of sale in connection with the marketing of the respective lines of their said articles of merchandise, in the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia.

3. Attended meetings held from time to time under the auspices of respondent Guild, at which the prices of said articles of merchandise manufactured or sold by respondent members were increased to retail dealer customers.

4. Adopted under the auspices of respondent Guild, trade practice rules forbidding certain trade deductions and allowances which had theretofore been permitted by said members to their customers. PAR. 5. The capacity, tendency, nnd effect of the aforesaid agreements, understandings, combinations, and conspiracies and the methods, acts, and practices and things done and performed by respondents in pursuance thereof are, and have been, to unreasonably lessen, suppress, and restrain competition in the sale and distribution of said articles of merchandise in commerce among and between the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia, and to deprive the public of the full benefit of competiton in ·said comme~e among and between the respondent members and between them and their competitors.

CONCLUSION The acts and practices of the respondents as herein found are all to the prejudice of the public; haven dangerous tendency to and hav~ actually hindered, suppressed, lessened, restrained, and eliminated price competition in the sale and distribution of formal evening dresses in commerce as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade CoJll· mission Act; have placed in respondents the power to control a~d enhance prices; have unreasonably restrained such commerce ~n formal evening dresses; and constitute unfair acts and practices Jll commerce and unfair methods of competition in commerce within the intent and meaning of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.. ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Commis· sion upon the complaint of the Commission and the answers of the EVENING DRESS GUILD, INC., ET AL. 585 575 Order respondents, in which answers the said respondents admit all the IDI!.terial allegations of fact set forth in said complaint and waive all intervening procedure and further hearings as to the facts; and the Commission having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that said respondents have violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

It is ordered, That respondents, Bouquet Formals, Inc., a corporation; Clover Dance Frocks, Inc., a corporation; Debonair Dance Frocks, Inc., a corporation; Gaytime Frocks, Inc., a corporation; Hollywood Formals, Inc., a corporation; Patio Dress Co., Inc., a corporation; Penelope Frocks, Inc., a corporation; Seville Dress Manu- . facturing Co., Inc., a corporation; Studio Dance Frocks, Inc., a corporation; Tango Formals, Inc., a corporation; and S. 'Vicha, Inc., a corporation, and their respective officers, representatives, agents, and employees; and respondents, Harry Goodman and Herman Goodman, individually, and as copartners, Joseph Scafuri, individually, and trading as Adorable Dance Frocks, and Murray E. Gottesman, Meyer Schatzberg, Jack Levy; and 1\Iike Reiter, individually, and their respective representatives, agents, and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device in connection with the ofl'.ering for sale, sale, and distribution of formal evening dresses or other similar articles of merchandise in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from entering into, continuing, cooperating in, or carrying out any planned comm011 rourse of action, mutual agreement, understanding, combination, or conspiracy between and among any two or more of said respondents or between any one or more of said respondents and others not parties hereto, to do or perform any of the following acts or practices: 1. Establishing, fixing, or maintaining prices, terms, or conditions of sale for formal evening dresses o'r other similar articles of merchandise, or adhering to or promising to adhere to prices, terms, or conditions of sale so fixed.

2. Holding or participating in any meeting or discussion among themselves or under th~ auspices of any association or other medium or agency when the intent, purpose, or effect of same is to fix, establish, · n1maintain, or adhere to the prices to be charged dealers for formal eve- ' ning dresses or other similar articles of merchandise. . . 3. Employing or utilizing any association or other medium or agency as an instrument, vehicle, or aid in establishing, fixing, or maintaining the prices, terms, or condit.ions of sale for formal evening dresses or other similar articles of merchandise. ~69637--44----40 Order 87F.T.O.

It is further ordered, That the complaint herein be, and the same hereby is, dismissed as to the respondents, Evening Dress Guild, Inc., a corporation; Darling Formals, Inc., a corporation; Judy Formals, Inc., a corporation; and Murray Oliphant, an individual. It i8 further ordert~d, That the respondents, shall within GO days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing, iietting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. · ' STANLEY J. REMUS k CO. ET AL. 587 Syllabus