Carl W. Herrmann, Inc.

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

IN THE ~L'l.TTER OF CARL 'V. I-IERR~1ANN , INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER , ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7988. Cumplnint, June 24, 1960-Decision, Oct. 4, 1960 Cnn!3ent order requiring a Pittsburgh furrier to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to set forth the terms "Persian Lamb" and D~' ed Broadtail processed Lamh" where required on labels and invoices, and by failing to comply in other respects with regulations under the Act. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Carl W. Herrmann, Inc., a corporation, and Carl W. I-Ierrmann, Jr., and Carl 'V. Herrmann, III, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act and it appearing to the Comnlission that a proceeding by it in respect the.reof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Carl 'V. Hermann, Inc., is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Pennsylvania. Its office and principal place of business is located at 516 Federal Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Carl 'V. Herrmann, Jr., is president, and Carl 'V. Herrmann, III is vice president and secretary of the said corporate respondent. These individuals control, formulate and direct the acts, practices l~" ontiS-G;~-5:;

, 850 FE'DERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECl'SIONS .complaint 57 F.

and policies of the said corporate respondent. Their office and principal place of business is the same as that of the said corporate respondent.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in commerce, of fur products, and have manufactured for sale, sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which had been shipped and received in commerce as the terms commerce fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

(a) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Re.gultaions.

(b) The term Persian Lamb was not set forth in the manner required where an election was made to use that term instead of Lamb in violation of Rule 8 of the said Rules and Regulations. (c) The term Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb was not set forth in the manner required where an election was made to use that term instead of Dyed Lamb in violation of Rule 10 of the said Rules and Regulations.

(d) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29 (b) of said Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

CARL Vl. HERRMANN, INC. , ET AL. 851 849 Decision PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: ( a) In formation required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of. Rule 4 of said Rules and R.egulations.

(b) The term "Persian Lamb" was not set forth in the manner required where an election was made to use that term instead of Lamb in violation of Rule 8 of the said Rules and Regulations. ( c) The term "Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb" was not set forth in the manner required where an election was made to use that term instead of Dyed Lamb in violation of Rule 10 of the said Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 7. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and decept,jve acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

llfr. Oharles 111. Connell for the Commission. No appearance for respondents.

INITIAL DECISION BY EARL J. KOLB HEARING EXAMINER The complaint in this proceeding issued June 24, 1960, charged respondents Carl ",V. Herrmann, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal ofiice and place of business located at 516 Federal Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Carl ",V. Herrmann, Jr., and Carl ",V. I-Ierrmnnn, III, individually and as officers of said corporation and located at the same address as the corporate respondent, with the use of unfair and deceptive acts and practices in interstate commerce in violation of the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

After the issuance of the complaint, respondents entered into an agreement containing consent order to cease and desist with counsel in support of the complaint, disposing of all the issues as to all parties in this proceeding.

It was expressly provided in said agreement that the signing thereof is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

852 FEDERAL TRADE COMl\IISSIOX DECISIONS Order ;37 Ii By the terms of said agreement, the respondents admitted all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and agreed that the record herein may be taken as if the Comll1ission had made findings of jurisdictional facts in accordance with the allegations. By said agreement, the respondents expressly waived any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission; the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law; and all the rights they may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in aecordance with the agreement. Hespondellts fllrt her agreed that. the order to cease and desist issued in accordance with said agreement, shall have the same force and effect as if made after a full hearing. It ,,-as further provided that said agreement, together with the complaint, shall constitute the entire record herein; that the complaint herein may be used in construing the terms of the order issued pursuilnt to said agreement; and that said order may altered, modified or set aside in the manner prescribed by the statute for orders of the Commission.

The he.aring examiner has considered such agreement and the order therein eontnined, and, it appearing that said agreement and order provides for an appropriate disposition of this proceeding, the same is hereby accepted and is ordered filed upon becoming part the Commission s deeision in accordance with Sections 3.21 and 3. of the Rules of Practice" and, in consonance with the terms of said agreement, the hearing examiner finds that the Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents ' named herein, that this proceeding is in the interest of the public, and issues the following order: ORDER It is o'/'de'/' That Carl W. I-Ierrmann, Inc. , a corporation, and~ its officers, and Carl 'V. Herrmann, Jr. and Carl ';Y. Herrmann III individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents representatives, agents and employees, direc.tly or through any corporate or other device, in eonne.ction with the introduction into commerce. , manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the sale advertising or offering for sale in commerce.e, or the transportation or distribution in commerce of fur proc1nc.ts, or in connection with the sale, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in whole. or in part of fur ,yhic.h has been shipped and received in , ) CARL "\V. HElml\JANN , 11\TC. , ET AL.

849 Decision commerce, as "commerce fur" and "fur product" are detll1ed 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 in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

B. Failing to set forth the term "Persian Lamb:' where an election is made to use that term instead of Lamb. C. Failing to set forth the term Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb where an election is made to use that term instead of Dyed Lamb. D. Setting forth on labels affixed to fur products information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder: ( 1) In abbreviated form;

(2) In handwriting.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products invoices showing all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. B. Setting forth information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the R.ules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form. C. Failing to set forth the term Pe.rsian Lamb where an election is made to use that term instead of Lamb. D. Failing to set forth the term Dyed Broadtail processed Lamb where an election is made to use that term instead of Dyed Lamb. DECISION OF THE CO:ND:IISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s R.nles of Practice the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 4th day of October, 1960, bec.ome the decision of the Commission; and, aceordingly:

It is onlered That respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after serviee upon them of this order, file with the Commission a re.port in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have c.ompliecl with the order to cease and desist. Complaint 57 F.T.C.