Gladdings, Inc.

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

In ture Matrer or GLADDINGS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7378. Complaint, Jan. 26, 1959—Decision, July 8, 1959 Consent order requiring a furrier in Providence, R.J., to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by labeling fur products with fictitious prices represented as regular retail prices; by failing to comply in other respects with labeling and invoicing requirements; and by advertising in newspapers which failed-to disclose the names of animals producing certain furs or that products contained artificially colored furs, failed to use the term “Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb” as required, and falsely represented prices of fur products as “below the furrier’s original cost.” Mr. John T. Walker for the Commission.

Edwards & Angel, by Mr. Edward Winsor, of Providence, R.1., for respondents.

Initia, Deciston By Apyer E. Lirscomp, Heartna EExaMIner The complaint herein was issued on January 26, 1959, charging Respondents with misbranding and falsely and deceptively invoic- 30 . FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Decision 56 FTC.

ing and advertising 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 May 7, 1959, Respondents, their counsel, 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 Cominission’s Bureau of Litigation, and thereafter submitted to the Hearing Examiner. for consideration.

The agreement identifies Respondent Gladdings, Inc. as a Rhode Island corporation, with its office and principal place of business located at 291 Westminster Street, Providence. Rhode Island, and individual Respondent Leonard E. Johnson as president of the said corporate Respondent, his address being the same as that of the said corporate Respondent.

Respondents admit all the juriscictional 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 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 inthe 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 Iexaminer 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, GLADDINGS, INC., ET AL. 31 20 Order It is ordered, That Respondents, Gladdings, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Leonard E. Johnson, individually, and as president of said corporation, 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, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, in commerce, of fur products, or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which are 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. Falsely or deceptively labeling or otherwise identifying such products as to the regular retail selling prices thereof by any representation that the regular or usual prices of such products are any among in excess of the prices at which Respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of business;

B. 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;

(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, dved 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 forintroduction into commerce; introduced it into commerce, sold it in commerce, advertised or offered it for sale, in commerce, or transported or distributed it im commerce; (6) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in a fur product;

C. Setting forth on labels affixed to fur products information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, mingled with non-required information ;

D. Failing to set forth the information required under 84(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in the required sequence ; Decision 56 EEC.

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 (juide 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 ;

B. Setting forth information required under §5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in abbreviated form;

3. 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: A. Fails to disclose:

(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;

(2) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact: B. Fails to set forth the term “Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb” in the manner required;

C. Represents, directly or by implication, that prices of fur products are “below the furrier’s original cost,” or words of similar import. and meaning, when such is not the fact. DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 8.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 8th day of July, 1959, become the decision of the Commission: and, accordingly : It is ordered, That Respondents Gladdings, Inc.. a corporation, and Leonard E. Johnson, individually and as president. of said corporation, shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of COMSTOCK CHEMICAL CO., INC., ET AL. 33 29 Decision 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.