Hauptman Feather Co., Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF HAUPTMAN FEATHER COMPA INC., ET AL. CO'MPLAIXT , FINDINGS. A D ORDERS I REGARD TO l' HE .ALLEGED VIOr A'l' ION OF SEC. :; OF AK ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26 , 1914 Docket 5832. Cornpla' int, Dec. 1950-Decision, Aug. , 1951 Where a corporation and its three offcers, engaged in the interstate sale and distribution of pilows Misrepresented the materials of which their pilows were made through attaching thereto labels which represented said materials, respectively, as " percent White Goose Down, 50 percent White Goose Feathers; as "Down as "25 percent Duck Down, 75 percent Duck Feathers; and as 50 percent Down, 50 percent Duck Feathers The facts being that the first pilow contained only 33.9 percent white goose down, 47 percent white goose feathers and other materials; that labeled Down " contained only 43. , instead of 100 percent thereof, the third con tained 10 percent duck down, 78.5 percent duck feathers and other materials; and the fourth contained only 25.4 percent down and 57 percent feathers; With tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive a substantial portion of the purchasing public with respect to their products and thereby cause it to purchase the same:

Held, That such act and practices, under the circumstances set forth, were all to the prejudice of the public and constituted unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce.

Before Mr. William L. Pack trial examiner. Mr. RussellI'. Porter for the Commission. Mr. Harry Il eller of Brooklyn . Y., for respondents. 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 Hauptman Feather Co., Inc., a corporation, and )iitchell Hauptman, Abraham Hanptman and Jean Rabinowitz, individually and as offcers of said corporation hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said act and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding 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 Hauptman Feather Co., Inc., is a cor poration organized and doing business under the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and principal place of business at 73- 'Vallabout Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. Respondents Mitchell Hauptman Abraham Hauptman, and Jean Rabinowitz are the president, seere- Complaint 48F. T, C.

tary, and treasurer, respectively, of said corporate respondent. Said individual respondents have at all times mentioned herein dominated directed, and controlled and now dominate, direct, and control the policies, affairs, and activities of corporate respondent. The addresses of the individual respolldents arc the same as that of the corporate respondent.

PAR. 2. Respondents ::'.re now, and for scyeral years last past, have been engaged in the sale of pillows to dealers for resale to the public. Respondents caused a:,ld have caused their said pillows when sold to be shipped from their' place of business in the State of New York to dealers in various other States of the United States and maintain and at an times mentioned he1'cin have maintained, a course of trado in their said pillows, in commerce, among and between the several States of the United Sbttes. Their business in such trade has been and is substantial.

PAR. 3. In the course a:ld conduct of their business respondents cause Jabels to be attached to their pilows purporting to state and set out the composition of the filling of said pillows. Typical, but not all ;DcJusive of these labels, are the following: 50% White Goose DOWL-50% White Goose Feathers " said pilio\v being designated as "Madison Down " said pilow being designated as "Imperial" 25% Down-75% Dnck F,:athel's " said pilow being designated as "Style #D" 50% Down-50% Duck FJathers " said pilow being designated as "Style #0" PAR. 4. By means of (:le statements appearing on the labels of said pillows, respondents represented that the filling of the pillow designated "l\ladison" was composed of 50 percent white goose down, the undercoating of a water:'fowl, and 50 percent white goose feathers; that the filling of the pillow designated "Imperial" was composed entirely of down, the uILdercoating of waterfowl; that the filling of the pillow desig11atcd "Seyle #D " was composed of 25 percent down the undercoating of waterfowl, and75 percent duck feathers; and that the filling of the pilow designated as "Style #0" was composed of 50 percent down, the undercoating of waterfowl, and 50 percent duck feathers.

PAll. 5. The statemencs appearing on the labels, as aforesaid, are false, misleading, and d,ceptive. In truth and in fact, the filling of the pillow designated a:3 "l\Iac1ison'\ consisted of 33. 9 percent white goose dO\vn, 54.7 percent goose feathers, 6.8 percent feather fiber, and the balance of other ma,:er;als. The filling of the pillow designated as "Imperial" was composed of 33.6 percent duck feathers, 43.2 percent down, and 23.2 per"ent feather fioor. The filling of the pilow designated as "Style #IY' contained 11.5 percent feather fiber in addi- HAUPTM FEATHEH co. , INC. ET AL. 199 197 Decisions tion to down and duck feathers and the filling of the pilow designated as "Style #C" contained 25.4 percent down, 57 percent duck feathers and 17.6 percent feather fiber. , PAR. 6. By attaching false, misleading and deceptive labels to their pilows, respondents placed in the hands of dealers, means and instrumentalities by and through which they may mislead the purchasing public as to the content of said pillows.

PAR. 7. The use by the respondents of the false, misleading and deceptive statements on the labels of their said products had, and now has, the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive a substantial portion of the purchasing public as to the content of their said pillows and to induce a substantial portion of the purchasing public to purchase their pilows because of the erroneous belief engendered by such statements.

PAR. 8. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, a8 herein alleged, are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION OF Tile COM:\:USSION Pursuant to Rule XXII of the Commission s rules of practice, and as set forth in the Commission s "Decision of the COlnmission and Order to File Report of Compliance " dated August 17, 1951, the initial decision in the instant matter of trial examiner 'William L. Pack, as set out as follows, became on that date the decision of the Commission.

INITIAL DECISIO BY WILLIA).I L. PACK, TRIAL EXAMINER Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act the Federal Trade Commission on December 8, 1950, issued and subsequently served its complaint in this proceeding upon the respondents named in the caption hereof, charging them with the use of unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation of the provisions of that act. After the filing by respondents of their answer to the complaint, a stipulation was entered into whereby it was stipulated and agreed that a statement of facts exeented by counsel supporting the complaint and counsel for respondents might be taken as the facts in this proceeding and in lieu of evidence in support of and in opposition to the charges stated in the complaint, and that such statement of facts might serve as the basis for findings as to the facts and conclusion based thereon and an order disposing of the proceeding. "Vhile counsel for respondents reserved in the stipulat.ion the right 200 FEDERAL 'frade COMMISSION DECISIONS Findings 48 F. T. C.

to file proposed findings and conclusions and to argue the matter orally before the trial e?:aminer, such reservations were subsequently waived. The stipulation 0 further provided that upon appeal to or review by the Commission such stipulation might be set aside by the Commission and this matter remanded for further proceedings under the complaint. Therea.:after the proceeding regularly came on for final consideration by tlB trial examinee upon the complaint, answer and stipulation, the stipulation having been a.approved by the trial examiner, who, after duly considering the record herein, finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public and makes the follo\ying findings as to the facts oncIusion clra,vll therefrom, and order. FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Hauptman Feather Co. , Inc.. , is a corporation organized and doing business under the laws of the State of New York, with its offe" and principal place of business located at 73-75 'Vallabont Street, Brooklyn . Y. Respondents MiteheH Hauptman, Abraham Hf_uptman, and Jean Rabinowitz are president secretary, and treasurer, respectively, of respondent corporation. The individual respondents dominate, direct, and control the policies affairs, and activities of toe corporation. PAR. 2. Respondents are now and for several years last past have been engaged in the sale of pilows, the pillows being sold to dealers for resale to the public. Respondents cause and have caused their pillows, when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the State of Kew York to purchasers in various other St.ates of the United States. Respondents maintain and have maintained a course of trade in their pillows in comlLcrce among and between the various States of the United States.

PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of their business respondents attach to their pillows labels purporting to state or set forth the materials of which such pillows are made. In some instances such labels have been inaccurate and misleading. In one instance a pillow labeled "50% White Goose Down, 60% White Goose Feathers actually contained only 33.9 percent white goose down and 47 percent white goose feathers, th3 remaining, content being other materials. In a.another instance the If bel on rt pillmv reftd simply "Down ': thereby representing that such pinow ,vas composed entirely of down, the undercoating of waterfc1wl, whereas the pillow actually contained only 43.2 percent down, the remaining content being duck feathers and other materials. 1:.1 a third instance a pillow labeled "25% Duck Down, 75% Duck Feathers" contained only 10 percent duck HAUPTMAL'l FEATHER CO. , INC. ET AL. 201 197 Order down and 78.5 percent duck feathers, the remaining content being other materials. In a fourth instance a pilow labeled "50% Down, 50% Duck Feathers" contained only 25.4 percent down and 57 percent duck feathers, together with certain other materials. PAR. 4. The acts and practices of respondents as set forth above have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deccive a substantial portion of the purchasing public with respect to respondents' products and the tendency and capacity to cause such portion of the public to purchase respondents' products as a result of the erroneous and n;jstaken belief so engendered.

CONCL'CSION The acts and praet.ices of the respondents as hereinabove set. out. are all to the prejudice of the public and constitut.e unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of t.he Federal Trade COlmnission Act.

ORDER It is ordered That t.he respondents, Hauptman Feather Co., Inc. a corporation, and its offcers, and j\fitchell Hauptman, Abraham Hauptman, and Jean Rabinowit.z, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents, and employees, directly or t.through any corporate or ot.her device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale and dist.ribution of pillows in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: Misrepresent.ing in any manner or by any means, directly or by implication, the mat.erials of which respondents' pillows are made. ORDER TO FIE REPORT OF 1PLINCE It i, ordered That the respondents herein shall, within 60 days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report. in writing setting forth in det.ail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist Las required by said declarat.ory decision and order of August. 17, 1951J. 202 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO:\T DECISIONS Syllabus 48 F. T. C.