Patrick Fruit Corporation

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

IN THE IATTER OF PATRICK FRUIT CORPORATIO~ CONSENT ORDER , ETC. : IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED Violation OF SEC. 2(c) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Docket 7933. COJnlJlaint, June l.9GO-Decfsion, May, 1961 Consent ordcl' requiring a Sanford, Fla. , packer of citrus fruit to cease violating Sec. 2(c) of the Clayton Act by paying brokerage, or its equivalent, to customers making purchases for their O"\YO accounts for resale. COl\PLAINT The Federal Trade Comlnission, having reason to believe that the party respondent named in the caption hereof, and hereinafter more, particularly described, has been and is now violating the provisions of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (D. C. Title 15, Section 13), hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges with respect thereto as follows: P ARAGlL\PII 1. Respondent Patrick Fruit Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under' and by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida, with its offce and principal place of business located at Sanford, Florida with mailing address as Post Offce Box 70, Sanford, Florida.

P .\R. 2. Respondent is now and for the past several.l years has been engaged in the business of packing, selling and distributing citrus fruit, such as oranges, tangerines and grapefruit, an of 'which are hereinafter sometimes referred to as citrus fruit or fruit products. R,espolldent sells and dist.ributes its citrus fruit through brokers, as wen as direct, to customers located in many sections of the United States. 'Vhen brokers are utilized in making sales for , respondent pa.ys them for their services l brokerage or c0111ni8sian, usually at the rate of 10 cents per 1% bushel box. H,espondenfs annual volume of business in the sale and distribution of citrus fruit is substantial.

PAH. 3. In the course and conduct of its business over the past sen:ral years, respondent has sold and distributell and is now selling and distributing its citrus fruit in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, as amende, , to buyers located in the several states of the united States other than the Stale of Florida in -which respondent is located. Hesponclent transports, or causes such citrus fruit, when wJd, to be transported from its piece of business or packing plant: or other pl8-ces, within the State of Florida to such buyers, or to t.he buyers' customers, located in vari- PATRICK FRUIT CORPORATION 869 868 Decision ous other states of the United States. Thus there has been, at all times mentioned herein, a. continuous course of trade in commerce in said citrus fruit across state lines between respondent and the respective buyers of such citrus fruit.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid respondent has been and is now making substantial sales of citrus fruit to some, but not all, of its brokers, and other direct buyers purchasing for their own account for resale, and on a large number of these sales respondent paid, granted or alJowecl, and is now pa.y ing, granting or allowing to these brokers a.nd other direct buyers on their purchases, a 00111111is8ion, bl'okcrage or other compensation or an allowance or discount in lieu thereof, in connection therewith. PAR. 5. The acts and practice,s of respondent as above aJlegecl and described are in violation of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (U. C. Title 15, Section 13). llfr. Cecil G. Niles and NT. E; Je8t G. Ba,F1w8 for the Commission. No appearance for respondent.

INITIAL DECISION BY EARL ,J. rCOLE. H.K\RIXG EX.UIINER The complaint in this proceeding issued June 1960, chaTges the respondent Patrick Fruit Corporation, a Florida corporation, located at Sanford, Florida, with violation of Section 2 (c) of the Clayton Act, as amended, in connection ''Iith packing, selling and distributing citrus fruit or fruit products.

After the issuance of the complaint: respondent entered into an agreement containing consent order to cease and desist with counsel in support of the complaint, disposing of all the issues in this proceeding, which agreement was duly approved by the Director and Associate Director of the Bureau of Litigation. It was expressly provided in said agrecme,nt that the signing thereof is for settlement purposes only and docs not constitute an admission by respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

By the terms of said agreement, the respondent admitted al1 the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and agreed that the record herein Inay be taken as if the Commission had made findings of jurisdictional.l facts in accordance with the allegations. By said agreement, the respondent expressly waived any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission; the making of finc1ingsof fact or conclusions of lav,.; and all the rights it may have to challe,nge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with the agreement. Decision :5R F. Respondent further agreed that the ordcr to cease and desist, issued in accordance lvith said agreement, shall have the same force and effect as if made after fl full hearing. It was 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 pursuant to said agreement; and that sflic1 order may be altered, modified or set aside in the manner prescribed by the statute for orders of the Commission.

The hearing examiner has considered such agreement and the order therein contained, and, it appearing that said agreement and order provides for an appropriate disposition of this proceeding, the same is hereby accepted and is ordered fied upon becoming part of the Commission s decisioll in acconlance with Sections 8.21 and 25 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 respondent named herein: and issues the following order:

ORDER It is ordered That the respondent Patrick Fruit CorporatioIl, fl corporation and its offcers agents: representatives and elnployees directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the sale of citrus fruit or fr llt products in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, do iortlndth cease and desist from:

Paying, granting, or allowing, directly or indirectly, to any buyer or to anyone, acting for or in behalf of or ,dlo i:: subject to the direct or indirect control of such buyer anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or discount. in lieu thereof, upon or in connection with any sale of citrus fruit or fruit products to such buyer for his own account. DECISION 01 THE CO)I1nSSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF CO:JfPLIANCE Pursna,nt to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 19th day of l'1ay, 1961 , become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly:

It is ordered That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, fie with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form ,which it has complied with the order to cease and desist. HOLLY HILL FRUIT PRODUCTS, INCORPORA 871 871 Complaint