Glaser & Yoffe, Inc.
Volume 55 · 55 F.T.C. 319
product labelingdeceptive advertising
Cite this decision
Glaser & Yoffe, Inc., 55 F.T.C. 319 (1958). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v055-0049
Report an error in this record (decision id v055-0049)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
IN THE MATTER OF GLASER & YOFFE, INC., ET AL.
CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7149. Complaint, May 14, 1958-Decision, Sept. , 1958 , to disclose the fiberConsent order requiring manufacturers in N atick, Mass. content and manufacturer s identification number on labels attached to woolen waste products; to cease furnishing false guaranties that such wool products were not misbranded; and to cease misrepresenting the fiber content on invoices or shipping memoranda. Mr. Kent P. KTatz supporting the complaint. Mr. Eugene O'Dunne, Jr. of Washington for respondents. INITIAL DECISION BY JOSEPH CALLAWAY, HEARING EXAMINER The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against the above-named respondents on May 14, 1958, charging them with having violated the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Wool Products Labeling Act as set forth in said complaint. After being served with the complaint respondents entered into an agreement, dated July 11, 1958, containing a consent order to cease and desist, disposing of all the issues. in this proceeding as to all respondents 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.
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 j urisdictional facts had been duly made 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 Order 55 F.
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 3.21 and 3.25 of the Rules of Practice, and the hearing examiner accordingly makes the following findings, for j urisdictional purposes, and ordel' :
1. Respondent Glaser & Yoffe, Inc., is a corporation existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la\vs of the State of Massachusetts with its office and principal place of business located at N. lVlain Street, N atick, 1\lass. 2. Individual respondents Eli Yoffe, Samuel Glaser, and Milton Linden are president, treasurer, and assistant treasurer-clerk respectively, of respondent corporation. They are active in the management of said corporation and are responsible for its acts practices and policies. The address of the individual respondents is the same as that of the corporate respondent. 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 Federal Trade Commission Act and under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulais in the public tions promulgated thereunder. This proceeding . interest.
ORDER It is ordered That respondent Glaser & Yoffe, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Eli Yofl'e Samuel Glaser, and Milton Linden, individually and as officers of said corporation, and re- GLASER & YOFFE , INC., ET AL. 321 323 Order spondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction or manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation, or distribution in commerce, as "commerce " is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act and the vVool Products Labeling Act of 1939 , of wool waste or other "wool products " as such products are defined in and subj ect to the \IV 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 , do forthwith cease and desist from:
A. Misbranding such products by:
1. Failing to securely affix to or place on each such prod uct a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification showing in a clear and conspicuous manner:
(a) The percentage of the total fiber weight of such \\'001 product, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding five percentum of said total fiber weight, of (1) wool, (2) reprocessed wool, (3) reused wool, (4) each fiber other than wool "INhere said percentages by weight of such fiber is five percentum or more, and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers;
(b) The maximum percentages of the total weight of such wool product of any non-fibrous, loading, filling or adulterating 111atter;
(c) The name or the registered identification number of the manufacturer of such vlool product or of one or more persons engaged in introducing such wool product into COlnmerce, or in the offering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution or delivery for shipment thereof in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. B. Furnishing false guaranties that \\'001 ,vaste or other wool products (as "wool products" are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act) are not misbranded under the provisions of the Wool Products Labeling Act, when there is reason to believe that the wool products so guaranteed may be introduced, sold, transported or distributed in commerce.
It is further ordered That respondents Glaser & Yoffe, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Eli Yoffe Samuel Glaser and IVlilton Linden, individually and as officers of said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection ,with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of wool waste or any other products in commerce, as "commerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forth\with cease and desist from: Decision 55 F.
Misrepresenting the constituent fibers of which their products are composed or the percentages thereof in invoices, shipping memoranda or in any other manner.
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 did, on the 11th day of September 1958, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly:
It 1~S ordered That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) day~ after service upon them 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.
CABLE RAINCOAT COMPANY ET AL. 323 Decision