Adolf Reizfeld

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

IN THE MATTER OF ADOLF REIZFELD, ET AL.

TRADING AS MR. ADOLF CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7416. Complaint, Feb. 19, 1959—Decision, June 13, 1959 Consent order requiring furriers in New Haven, Conn., to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to comply with the labeling and invoicing requirements.

Mr. Frederick McManus for the Commission. Respondents, for themselves.

INITIAL DECISION BY ABNER E. LIPSCOMB, HEARING EXAMINER The complaint herein was issued on February 19, 1959, charging respondents with misbranding and falsely and deceptively invoicing certain of their fur products, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Thereafter, on April 15, 1959, respondents and counsel supporting the complaint herein entered into an Agreement Containing Consent Order to Cease and Desist, which was approved by the director and an assistant director of the Commission’s Bureau of Litigation, and thereafter submitted to the hearing examiner for consideration.

The agreement identifies respondents Adolf Reizfeld and Esther Reizfeld as individuals and copartners trading as Mr. Adolf, with their office and principal place of business at 817 Chapel Street, New Haven, Conn. The given name of the second respondent is shown in the complaint and in the text of the agreement as “Esther,” but appears in that respondent’s signature on the agreement as “Estar.” No question has been raised as to the identity of this respondent, and, accordingly, she will hereinafter be referred to as Estar Reizfeld.

Respondents admit all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint, and agree that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been duly made in accordance with such allegations.

Respondents waive any further procedure before the hearing examiner and the Commission; the making of findings of fact Order 55 F.T.C.

or conclusions of law; and all of the rights they may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with the agreement. All parties agree that the record on which the initial decision and the decision of the Commission shall be based shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement; that the order to cease and desist, as contained in the agreement, when it shall have become a part of the decision of the Commission, 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; that the complaint herein may be used in construing the terms of said order; and that the agreement is for settlement purposes only, and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint. Having considered the allegations of the complaint and the provisions of the agreement and the proposed order, the hearing examiner is of the opinion that such order constitutes a satisfactory disposition of this proceeding. Accordingly, in consonance with the terms of the aforesaid agreement, the hearing examiner accepts the Agreement Containing Consent Order to Cease and Desist; finds that the Commission has jurisdiction over the respondents and over their acts and practices as alleged in the complaint; and finds that this proceeding is in the public interest. Therefore, It is ordered, That Adolf Reizfeld and Estar Reizfeld, individually and as copartners trading as Mr. Adolf, or under any other name, and respondents’ 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 sale, offering for sale, transportation or distribution in commerce, of fur products, or in connection with the sale, manufacture for sale, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as “commerce,” “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: 1. Misbranding fur products by:

A. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing: (1) 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; , cs MR. ADOLF 1975 1973 Order (2) That the fur product contains or is composed of used fur, when such is the fact;

(3) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact; (4) That the fur product is composed in whole or in substantial part of paws, tails, bellies, or waste fur, when such is the fact;

(5) The name, or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more persons who manufactured such fur product for introduction into commerce, introduced it into commerce, sold it in commerce, advertised or offered it for sale in commerce, or transported or distributed it in commerce; (6) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in a fur product;

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing:

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

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

(8) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact; (4) That the fur product is composed in whole or in substantial part of paws, tails, bellies, or waste fur, when such is the fact;

(5) The name and address of the person issuing such invoice; (6) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in a fur product;

(7) The item number or mark assigned to a fur product; B. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products the name or names of any animal or animals in addition to the name or names provided for in §5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act;

C. Setting forth information required under 85(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form; D. Failing to set forth the information required under §5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regula- Decision 55 E.T.C.

tions thereunder with respect to “new fur” or “used fur” added to fur products that have been repaired, restyled or remodeled. 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 13th day of June 1959, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly:

It is ordered, That respondents Adolf Reizfeld and Estar Reizfeld (cited in the complaint as Esther Reizfeld), individually and as copartners trading as Mr. Adolf, shall, within sixty (60) days 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.

FULTON TOOL CO. 1977 Decision