Bernard M. Abrahams

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

IN THE MATTER OF BERNARD M. ABRAHAMS ET AL.

TRADING AS ABRAHAMS m OTHERS CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF 'l' HE :l"EDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE Fuji- PIWDUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 8188. Complaint, Nov. 1960-Decision, Ar)F. , 1961 Consent order requiring New York City furriers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by advertising in newspapers which failed to disclose the names of animals producing certain furs or the country of origin of imported furs, represented prices of fur products as reduced from purported regular prices which were in fact fictitious, and, by use of such claims as " Save to 20% or more on any fur in stock" , that regular prices were reduced in that percentage when such was not true, and \which failed in other respects to comply with requirements; and by failng to keep adequate records as . a basis for pricing claims. IPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, fl1d by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Bernard :yr. Abrahams, Sherman Abrahams and Donald :yr. Abrahams, individually and as copartners trading , ABRAHAMS BROTHERS 551 550 Complaint as Abrahams Brothers, hereimdter 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 Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

P ARAGRAPIl 1. Bernard 31. Abralunns, Sherman Abrahams and Donald 1\1. Abrahams are individuals and copartners trading as Abrahams Brothers with their offce and principal place of business located at 119 ,Yest 40th Street, New York, New York. PAR. 2. Subsequcnt to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9 , 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction int.o commerce and in the sale advertising, and onering for sale, in com111eree, and in the transportation, and distribution, in commerce, of fur products; and have sold advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole 01' 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 falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that respondents caused the dissemination in conunercc, as "commerce is defined in said Aet, of certain ne'\spaper advertisements, concerning said products, which were not in a.accordance with the provisions of Section 5 (a) of the said Act and the Rules and Rcgulations promulgated thereunder; and which advertisements were intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of said fur products.

PAn. 4. Among and included in the advertisements as aforesaid but not limited thereto, were advertisements of respondents which appeared in issues of the Ilinois State Register, a newspaper published in the City of Springfield, State of Illinois, and having a wide circulation in sflid State and various other States of the United States.

By means of said advertisements and others of similar import and meaning, not specifically referred to herein, respondent falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in that said advertisements: (a) Failed to disclose the name or names of the animal or animals that produced t.he fur contained in the Iur product as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide, in violation of Section 5(a) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

(b) Failed to disclose the name of the country of origin of the imported fms contained in the fur products, in violation of Section 5(a) (6) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. \.

552 FEDERAL TRADE CO:YL\IISSION DECISIO:\S Decision 58 :F' (c) Contained information required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act ancl the Rules lnd Regulations promulgated thereunder \\hieh \yas set forth in type of equal size and conspicuousness tlnd in close proximity \with each other, in violation of H.ule 38(a) of saiel Rules and Regulations. (d) Hepresented prices of fur products as having been reduced from regular or usual prices \"here the so-caned regular or usual prices were in fact iictitious in that they were not the prices at which said merchandise \vas llsl1aJly sold by respondents in the recent regular course of business, in violation of Section 5 (a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Hule H (a) of said Rules and eglllations.

(e) Represented through the use of percentage savings claims such a,s "Save to 20% or more on any fur in st.ock" that the regular or 11s11a1 prices charged by respondents for fur products in the recent regular e0111'8e of business ''1131'13 reduced in direct proportion to the pe1'center,ge of savings stated when such was not the fact in violation of Section 5(a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. \R. ;). H.respondents in adye1'tising fur products for sale as aforesaid made claims and representations respecting t,he prices and values of fur productfi. Respondents in making such claims and representations failerl to maintain full and ac1equnte re,cords disclosing the facts upon which such c1aimi' and representations ere based in violation of Rule 4 l(e) of the s Lid Hule.s and He.gulatiolls. -\R. G. The aforesaid nds and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and R.egulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and (leeept,ive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Ct.

JJr. JNchacl P. II1lghes for the Commission. Mr. A. L01d8 Ore81nan by MI'. D,n,id Jt. Levitan. of New York N. Y., for respondents.

I;.ITIAL DECISION BY ABNER E. LIPSCO:UD. IIE_\JUXG EX.\:;UXEH The complaint herein was issued on X ovember 28 : 1060, charging the Respondents \'\ith violation of the Federal Trflde Commission Act. and of the Fur Products Labeling -" d ancl the Rules and Hegulations promulgated there.under, by fa Iso ly and deceptively advertising certain of their fur products, and by failing to Hlfintain full :md adequate rceords disclosing the facts upon which were based certain claims and representations respect,ing the prices and values of fur products.

, ..

ABRAHAMS BROTHERS 553 550 Decision Thereafter, on February 1 , 1961, Hespondents, 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 Associate Director and Assistant Director of the Commission s Bureau of Lit.ignJion, and thereafter, on February 17 1\)61, submitted to the IIearing Examiner for considerat.ion. The agreement identifies Respondents Bernard 1d. Abrahams, Sherman Abrahams and Dona.lcl I. Abrahams as individuals and copartners t.trading as A brahams Brothers, with their offc.e and prinoipal , Ke,phce of business located at 119 Vest 40th Street, New York York.

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

Respondents waive flny further procedure before the Hearing Examiner and t.he Commission; the making of findings of fact and conc.usions of law' ; and all of the rights they may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to ceflse and desist. entered in accorda,nce with the agreement. An parties agree that the record on ,which the initial de,cision 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 c.ontainec1 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 comphint herein may be llsed in construing the terms of said order; and that the agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by Respondents that that have violated the law as alleged in the complaint. After consideration of the allegations of the complajnt, and the provisions of the agreement and the proposed order, the I-Iearing Examiner is of the opinion that. such order constitutes a. satisfact.ory disposition of this proceeding. Accordingly, in consonance with the terms oJ the aforesaid agreement, the Ilea ring Examiner accepts the Agreement Containing Consent. Order To Cease And Desist; finds that. the COllllnission has jurisdiction over the R,respondents and er their acts and practices as a11cged in the complaint; and finch that this proceeding is in the public interest. Therefore It is ordered That, Bernard J1. Abrahams, SherJ1fll Abrahams and Donal(1 )1. Abrahams: indiyic1nally and as copartners trading as Abrahams Drothers or under any other trade name, and Respondents representati ves, agents and employees, directly or through any corpo- , 554 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIOKS Decision 58 F.

rate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, ad verHshlg, or offering ror sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce of fur products, or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering ror sale, transportation, or distribution or rur 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 definec1in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from. 1. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public allnouncement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or the 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 products as set forth in the Fur Products :N ame Guide and as prescribed under the Hules and Regulations; 2. The nalTIe of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in a fur product;

B. Fails to set forth the information required under 85 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in type of equal size and conspicuousness and in close proximity with each other;

C. Represents directly or by implication that the regular or usual price of any fur product is any amount which is in excess of the price at which Respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of business; D. Represents directly or by implication through percentage savings claims that the regular or usual prices charged by Respondents for fur products in the re,cent regular course of business were reduced in direct proportion to the amount of savings stated \Vhen contrary to the fact;

:J\aking pricing elaims or representations respecting prices or yalues of fur products unless Respondents maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based.

DEOISIOX OF Tile co nIIsSIOK AND onmm TO FILE REPORT OF COl\IPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 6th day of April 1961, become the decision of the Commission; and accordingly:

J t is ordered That respondents Bernard I. Abrahams, Sherman Abrahams and Donald J\I. Abrahams, individually and as copartners vVBSTENBERGER' 555 Complaint trading as Abrahams Brothers, 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 eompliecl with the order to cease and desist.