Milgrim, Inc.

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

In THE Matrer oF MILGRIM, INC.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7759. Complaint, Jan. 26, 1960—Decision, May 19, 1960 Consent order requiring Detroit, Mich., merchandisers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by labeling which falsely identified the animal producing the fur in certain products; by failing to set forth the term “Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb” on invoices and in advertising: by advertising in newspapers, which failed to disclose the names of animals pro- MILGRIM, INC. 1485 1434 Decision ducing certain furs or the country of origin of imported furs or the fact that some furs were artificially colored, which used the term “blended” to describe the bleaching, dyeing, etc., of furs, and which failed to maintain adequate records for pricing and value claims; and by failing in other respects to comply with labeling, invoicing, and advertising requirements. Mr. Garland S. Ferguson for the Commission. Mr. Martin Schlesinger, of New York, N.Y., for respondent. Inrt1au Decision sy J. Earn Cox, Heartnc Examiner The complaint charges that respondent has violated the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, by misbranding and falsely and deceptively invoicing and advertising certain fur products, and by failing to maintain full and accurate records disclosing the facts upon which its claims and representations respecting the prices and values of fur products were based. After the issuance of the complaint, respondent, its counsel, and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement containing consent order to cease and desist, which was approved by the Director and Assistant Director of the Commission’s Bureau of Litigation, and thereafter transmitted to the hearing examiner for consideration.

The agreement states that respondent Milgrim, Inc., is a corpora-. tion existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Michigan, with its office and principal place of business located at 326 Fisher Building, 3011 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan.

The agreement provides, among other things, that respondent admits all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint, and agrees that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been duly made in accordance with such allegations; that the record on which the initial decision and the decision of the Commission shall be based shall consist solely of the complaint and this 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 the complaint, may be used in construing the terms of the order agreed upon, which may be altered, modified or set aside in the manner provided for other orders; that the agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint; and that. the order set. forth in the agreement and hereinafter included in this decision shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing.

599869-—62 92 Order 56 F.T.C.

Respondent waives any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, the making of findings of fact or conclusions of Jaw, and all of the rights it may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with the agreement.

The order agreed upon fully disposes of all the issues raised in the complaint, and adequately prohibits the acts and practices charged therein as being in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Accordingly, the hearing examiner finds this proceeding to be in the public interest, and accepts the agreement containing consent order to cease and desist as part of the record upon which this decision is based. Therefore, It is ordered, That respondent Milgrim, Inc., a Michigan corporation, and its officers and respondent's 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 any such product as to the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which such product was manufactured; B. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of $4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act;

C. Setting forth on labels affixed to fur products: 1. Information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form;

2. Information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations mingled with non-required information;

3. Information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting;

MILGRIM, INC. 1487 1484 Order D. Failing to set forth all the information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder on one side of labels; E. Failing to set forth separately on labels attached to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs the information required under §4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder with respect to the fur comprising each section; I. Failing to set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to a fur product;

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products an invoice showing all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of §5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act; 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;

C. Failing to set forth the term “Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb” when an election is made to use that term instead of “Lamb”; D. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to a fur product;

3. Falsely or deceptively advertismg 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 by 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; °3. The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in the fur product;

B. Fails to set forth the term “Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb” when an election is made to use that term instead of “Lamb”; C. Sets forth the term “blended” as part of the information required under §5(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing or tip-dveine of furs; D. Fails to set forth separately in advertisements relating to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs, the information required under §5(a) of the Fur Prod- 14388 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Decision 56 F.T.C.

ucts Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, with respect to the fur comprising each section; 4. Making claims and representations in advertisements respecting prices and values of fur products unless respondent maintains full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based.

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 19th day of May, 1960, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly: :

Lt ts ordered, That respondent Milgrim, Inc., a Michigan corporation, shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with the order to cease and desist.