Teitelba Um of Beverly Hills

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

IN THE MATTER OF TEITELBA UM OF BEVERLY HILLS ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 6,9,98. Co' lIIplatnt, Dec. 1.957-Dccision, Sept. , 1958 Consent order requiring a funier in Los Angeles, Calif., to cease violating the Fur Products Laueling Act by failing to comply with the invoicing requil'iments; by advertising in newspapers which failed to disclose the names of animals producing the fur in certain products or the country of origin of imported furs, or that some products were artificially colored; misused the word "blended" ; represented Prices as reduced from regular prices which were in fact fictitious, and misrepresented percentage savings and appraised values; and by failing to keep adequate records as a basis for such pricing claims, 1M?'. John J. 111 eN ally supporting the complaint. Iv!?'. David Blonder of Los Angeles, Calif., for respondents. INITIAL DECISION BY JOSEPH CALLAWAY, HEARING EXAMINER The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint. against the above-named respondents on December 18, 1957 , charging them with having violated the Fur Products Labeling Act, the rules and regulations issued thereunder, and the Federal Trade Commission Act by falsely advertising and falsely invoicing their fur products. After being served vvith the complaint respondents entered into an agreement, dated April 15, 1958, containing a consent order to cease and desist, disposing of all the issues in this proceeding without hearing, \which agreement has been duly approved by the assistant director and the director of the Bureau of Litigation. Said agreement has been submitted to the undersigned, heretofore duly designated to act. as hearing examiner herein, for his consideration in accordance with Section 3.25 of the Rules of Practice of the Commission. The complaint alleges that respondent David Weisz is not officer of the corporate respondent. The said agreement states among other things that David vVeisz while not an officer of said corporate respondent at the time of the issuance of the complaint became president of the corporate respondent on February 12 1958. The agreement further provides that the agreed order to cease and desist shall run against David Weisz individually and as an officer of said corporation. To that extent the said agree- TEITELBA UM OF BEVERLY HILLS ET AL. 285 284 Decision ment is, in effect, a motion to amend the complaint, agreed to by respondents, so as to make David Weisz a party respondent in his capacity as an officer of the corporate respondent as well as in his individual capacity. Said motion is granted and the com- , plaint is considered as amended.

Respondents, pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, have admitted all of the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint and agreed that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been made duly in accordance with such allegations. Said agreement further provides that respondents waive all further procedural steps before the hearing examiner or the Commission, including the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law and the right to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with such agreement. It has also been agreed that the record herein shall consist solely of the complaint and said agreement, that the agreement shall not become a part of the official record unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission, that said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint, that said order to cease and desist shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and may be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided for other orders, and that the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order.

This proceeding having now come on for final consideration on the complaint and the aforesaid agreement containing the consent order, and it appearing that the order and agreement cover all of the allegations of the complaint and provide for appropriate disposition of this proceeding, the agreement is hereby accepted and ordered filed upon this decision and said agreement becoming part of the Commission s decision pursuant to Sections 21 and 3.25 of the Rules of Practice, and the hearing examiner accordingly makes the follo\ving findings, for jurisdictional purposes, and order:

1. Respondent Teitelbaum of Beverly Hills is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California.

2. Respondents Milton J. \Versho\v, individually, and David vVeisz, indi vid ually and as an officer of said corporate respondent control, direct, and formulate the acts, practices and policies of corporate respondent. The offices and principal places of busilless Order 55 F.

of all said respondents are located at 7213 Melrose A venue, Los Angeles, Calif., and 840 San Julian Street, Los Angeles, Calif. 3. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents hereinabove named. The complaint states a cause of action against said respondents under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act, and this proceeding is in the interest of the public.

ORDER It is o1'dered That respondents Teitelbaum of Beverly Hills a corporation, and its officers, and David Weisz, individually, and as an officer of said corporation, and Milton J. Wershow, individually, and respondents ' representatives, agents and employees directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce or the sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce of any fur product or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms commerce fur " and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act do forthwith cease and desist from: A. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Falsely or deceptively invoicing or otherwise identifying any such product as to the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which such product vvas manufactured. 2. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing:

(a) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product as set forth in the Fur Products N an1e Guide and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations.

(b) That the fur product contains or is composed of used fur when such is a fact;

(c) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached dyed, or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is a fact; (d) That the fur product is composed in whole or in substantial part of paws, tails, bellies or waste fur when such is a fact; (e) The name and address of the person issuing such invoice; (f) The name of the country of origin of any imported fur contained in a fur product;

TEITELBA UM OF BEVERLY HILLS ET AL. 287 284 Order (g) The item number or mark assigned to a fur product; (h) That the fur product contains "secondhand used fur" when such is a fact.

3. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products: (a) Information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

(b) The term "blended" to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing or tip-dyeing of furs.

B. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products, through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement, or notice which is intended to aid, promote, or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale or offering for sale of fur products and which:

1. Fails to disclose:

(a) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations.

(b) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or othenvise artificially colored fur when such is a fact; (c) That the fur product contains "secondhand used fur" when such is a fact;

(d) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in afur product.

2. Contains the term " blended" to describe the pointing, dyeing or tip-dyeing of furs.

3. Represents directly or by implication that the regular or usual price of any fur product is any amount which is in excess of the price at which the respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of their business. 4. Represents directly or by implication through percentage savings claims that the regular or usual retail prices charged by respondents for fur products in the recent regular course of their business were reduced in direct proportion to the amount of savings stated when contrary to the fact.

5. Represents directly or by implication that fur products are of a certain certified appraised value \,Then contrary to fact. 6. Represents directly or by implication that no merchandise has been added to the original inventory obtained from a wellknown and famous furrier \\Then such is not the fact. C. l\1aking pricing claims and representations of the types Decision 55 F.

referred to in subparagraphs B3 and B4 above unless there are maintained by repondents full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims or representations are based. DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 3d day of September 1958, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly, It is 0J'de1' That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) days after service upon then1 of this order, file with the Commission a report in \writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist.

HACHMEISTER, INC., ET AL. 289 Decision