Martin Stuart Woolen Company

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

In THe MatTrer or MARTIN STUART WOOLEN COMPANY ET AL.

‘CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7479. Complaint, Apr. 80, 1959—Decision, Sept. 17, 1959 ‘Consent order requiring New York City manufacturers to cease violating the Wool Products Labeling Act by labeling and identifying on invoices and shipping memoranda as “100% Cashmere,” fabrics which contained a substantial quantity of fibers other than cashmere, and by failing to label wool products as required.

Mr. Frederich McManus supporting the complaint. Mr, Sidney Silverstein of Higgins & Silverstein, of Woonsocket, R.1., for respondents.

Titra, Decision py Joun B. Pornpexrer, Hearinc Examiner On April 80, 1959, the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint charging that Martin Stuart Woolen Company, a corporation, and Abraham Baker, individually and as an officer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, had violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Wool Products MARTIN STUART WOOLEN CO. ET AL. 311 310 Findings Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the last-named act.

After issuance and service of the complaint, the respondents and their counsel and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement for a consent order. The agreement has been approved by the Director and the Assistant Director of the Bureau of Litigation. The agreement disposes of the matters complained about. The pertinent provisions of said agreement are as follows: Respondents admit all jurisdictional facts; the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order; the order shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and the said agreement shall not become a part of the official record of the proceeding unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission; the record herein shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement; respondents waive the requirement that the decision must contain a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law; respondents waive further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, and the order may be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided by statute for other orders; respondents waive any right to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered in accordance with the agreement and the signing of 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.

The undersigned hearing examiner having considered the agreement and proposed order and being of the opimion that the acceptance thereof will be in the public interest, hereby accepts such agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and issues the following order:

JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS 1. Respondent Martin Stuart Woolen Company is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Rhode Island, with its office and principal place of business located at 450 7th Avenue, New York, New York. 2. Respondent Abraham Baker is an officer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, directs and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respondent. including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. His office is also located at 450 7th Avenne, New York, New York.

3. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

Order 56 F.T.C.

ORDER It ts ordered, That the respondents Martin Stuart Woolen Company, a corporation, and its officers, and Abraham Baker, individually, and as an officer of said corporation, 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 offering for sale, sale, transportation or distribution in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act. of 1939, of wool products, as such products are defined in and subject to the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1989, do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding such products by : 1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of the constituent fibers included therein.

2. Failing to securely affix or place on each such product 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 wool products, exclusive of ornamentation not. exceeding five percentum of said total fiber weight, of (1) wool, (2) reused wool, (3) reprocessed wool, (4) each fiber other than woo] where said percentage by weight of such fiber is five percentum or more, and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers:

(b) The maximum percentage of the total weight of such wool products of any non-fibrous loading, filling or adulterating matter ; (c) The name or the registered identification number of the manufacturer of such wool product or of one or more persons engaged in introducing such wool products into commerce, 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 1989.

It is further ordered, That the respondents Martin Stuart Woolen Company, a corporation, and its officers, and Abraham Baker, individually, and as an officer 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 fabrics in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from, directly or indirectly:

Misrepresenting the character or amount of the constituent fibers contained in such products in invoices or shipping memoranda applicable thereto, or in any other manner. NEPTUNE GARMENT CO. ET AL. 313 310 Decision 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 17th day of September, 1959, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly :

It is ordered, That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) days after service wpon 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.