Deerfield Groves Company, Inc.

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

IN THE :\fatter OF DEERFIELD GROVES COMPANY , IKC.

CO:NSEXT Order ETC. : IN rtF-GAHD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OY SEC. 2(c) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Docket 8003. Cornplq:i.nt, June 2"1, lDGO-Decision, May 1961 Consent order requiring a packer of citrus fruit in Wabasso, Fla. , to cease violating Sec. 2(e) of the Clayton, Act by paying brokerage, or its equivalent to cllstomers making purchases for their own accounts for resale, 896 FEDERAL TRADE cO :'nSSIOK DECISIONS Complaint 58 F.

COMPLI\INT The Federal Trade Commission, 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 (V. C. Title 15 , Section 13), hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges with respect thereto as follmvs: PARAGRAPH 1. Responde,nt Deerfield Groves Company, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its offce aud principal place of business located at vVabasso, Florida. PAR. 2. Respondent is now and since January 1 , 1957 has been engaged in the business of packing, selling and distributing citrus fruit: , such as oranges, tangerines and grapefruit, an of which are hereinafter referred to as citrus fruit or fruit products. Respondent sells and distributes its citrus fruit through brokers, as well as direct to customers located in many sections of the l united States. when brokers are utilized in making sales for it, respondent pays them for their services a brokerage or commission, usually at thb rate of 10 cents per 1% bushel box, or equivalent. Respondent s annual volume of business in the sale and distribution of C-trus fruit is substantial. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of its business over the past several years, respondent has sold and distributed and is now selling and distributing its citrus fruit in commerce, as "commerce ' is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, as amended, to buyers located in the several states of the United States other than the State of Florida in which respondent is located. Hesponclent transports, or causes such citrus fruit, when sold, to be t.transported from its place of business or packing plant in the State of Florida, or from other places within the State, to such buyers or to the buyers) customers located in various other states of the l7united States. Thus there has been at all times mentioned herein ) a continuous course of trade in commerce in such citrus fruit across state lines between said respondent and the respective buyers of such fruit.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of its unsines:: as aforesaid respondent has been and is now making snbstnntial nles of citrus fruit to SOlle but not all of its brokers and direct hnyers pure-hasing for t.their mYll account for resale, and on a large number of these. sale.s respondent paid, gnllted or allowed. and is nmy paying, granting or allowing to these brokers anel other direct buyers on their purchase, , a commission, brokerage, or other compenso.tion or an o.11O\"\ance 01' discount in lieu thereof, in connection there"\with. DEERFIELD GROVES COMPA." IKC. 897 895 Decision PAR. 5. The acts and practices of respondent, as above aUegcd and described, arc jn violation of subsect.ion (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (L. C. Title 15, Seclion 13). Ah. Oecil G. Aliles and ;lh. Ernest o. Barnes supporting the complaint.

Joan.son Johnson of Tampn Ii' la. , for respondent. INITIAL DECISION OF JOHN LEWIS, :HEARING EXAMINER The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against tho above-named respondent on .Tune 27 1960 charging it with having violated Section 2(c) of the Clayton Act, as amended. After being served with said complaint, respondent entered into an agreement related December 14 , 1960, containing a consent order to cease and desist purporting t.o dispose of all of this proceeding as to all parties together with a stipulation maldng more specific thl'. acts and practices complained of and the intent of the order. Said agreement which has been signed by responde, , by counsel for said respondent and by counsel supporting the complaint, and approved by the Director and Associate Director of the Commission s Bureau oJ Litigat.ion, has be,en submitted to the above-named hearing examiner for his consideration, in :lccol'dance with Section 3.25 of the Commission s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative I)roceedings. Respondent, pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, has admitted a11 the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint an,l agreed that the record may be taken as if findings of jl1risdictionrll facts had been duly made in accordance ,with such allegations. Said agreement further provides null respondent YUlives ilny further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission making of findings of fact or conclusions of hnv and all of the rights, the it may have to challenge or contest. the validity of the order to cease and de-sist eute-red in aecordanee with such agre( ment. It has been agreed that the order to cease and desist issued in accordance '''1th said agreement shall have the same forc.e and effect as if entered after a full hearing and that the complaint may be used in construing the terms of said order. It has also been agreed that the record herein shall consist solely of the complaint and said agreement, and t.hat said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not cons6tute an admission by respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the. complaint.

This proceeding having nm\" come on for final cOllsjderation 011 the complaint and the aforesaid agreement cont.aining consent order together with the stipulation which has been made a part of :!.'7- '1- - ;jS 898 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIOKS Dt'(ision GS F.

sa.id agreement, and it appearing that the order provided for in said agreement covers all of the aHegations of the complaint and provides for an appropriate disposition of this proceeding as to all parties, saiel agreement is hereby accepted and is orcleTcd filed upon this decision s becoming the decision of the Commission pursuant to Sections 3.21 and 3.25 of the Commission s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings, and the, hearing examiner, accordingly, makes the follo,ying jurisdictional findings and order: 1. Respondent Dccrf-cld Groves Company, lne. is a corporation existing and doing business under' and by virtue of the laws of the State of Kew Jersey, with its omee and principal place of business located at \Vabasso, Florida.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of ihe subject matter of this proceeding and of ihe respondent hereinabove. named. The complaint states a cause of action against. said respondent under the provisions of the Clayton Act.

ORDER It is ordered That the respondent Deerfielc1 Groves Company, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with t.he sale of citrus fruit or fruit products in commerce as "commerce" is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

Paying, granting or allowing, directly or indirectly, to any buyer or to anyone acting for or in behalf of, or \vho - is subject to the direct or indirect control of Slh.Jl uuyer, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or dis count in lieu thereof upon or in connection ,,,ith any sale of citrus fruit or fruit products to such buyer for his own account. DECISION OF THE C01.IlIISSION AND OlWER TO FILE REPORT OF COJrrLIAKCE The Commission having now determined that the hearing examiner s initial decision, filed January 31 , 1961, is adequRtc and a.ppropriate to dispose of this proceeding:

J t 'is onlered That saiel decision be, and it hereby is, a.adopted as the decision of the COlIrnissioll.

it is j,,"thej' o",leged That the respondent shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order iile with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in v,which it has comp1iec1 ,,,ith the order to cease Hnd desist coniained in the aforesaid initial decision.

FULL GRIFFIN, IKC. 899 899 Complaint Ix THE IATTER OF BE~ HILL GRIFFIN, INC.

COXSEXT OIWER, ETC., IN ImGAIil TO THE ALLEGED VJOLATION OF SEC. 2(e) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Doclcet 8004. Con plaint, June 1960-Decision, May 19, 1961 Consent order requiring a citrus fruit packer in Frostproof, Fla. , to cease violating Sec. 2(c) of the Clayton Act by paying brokerage, or its equivalent, to customers making purchases for their own accounts for resale. COMPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, 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 fo1Jows:

P AR:'.GRAPH 1. Respondent Ben :Hill Griffn, Inc., is a corporation orga,nizcd, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the Stale of Florida, with its offec and principal place of business located at Frostproof, Florida, with mailing address as Post Offcc Box 127, Frostproof, Florida.

PAR. 2. Respondent is no-y and since January 1 , 1957 has been engaged in the business of packing, selhng and distributing citrus fruit" such as oranges, tangerines a,nd grapefruit aU or which are hereinafter referred to as citrus fruit or fruit products. Respondent sells and distributes its citrus fruit. through brokers as \vell as direct, to customers located in many sections or the United States. 1I;'hen brokers are utilized in making sales for it, respondent pays them for their services it brokerage or commission, usually at the rate of 10 cents per 1% bushel box, or equivalent. Respondent' annual volume of business in the sale and distribution or citrus rruit is suhst.antinJ.

PAR. 3. In the course fl1d conduct or its business over the past several Tears respondent has sold and distributed and is now sening !:nd distributing its citrus fruit in COlnmerce, as "commerce" is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, as amended, to buyers located in the seve.ral states of the L'nitecl St.utes other than the State or Florida jll \which respondent is located. Respondent transports, or causes such citrus fruit, ,,,hen sold to be transported from its place or business or pflcking plant in the Stn.te or Florida, or from other places within the SLate to such buyers or to the buyers' customers located 900 FEDERAL TRADE COMlIHSSION DECISIOKS Decision 58 in various other st tes of the United States. Thus there has been, at all times mentioned herein, a continuous course of trade in commerce ill such cit.rus fruit across state lines between said I;espondent a,ncl the respective buyers of such fruit.

AH. 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 al1 , of its brokers and direct buyers purchasing for their own account for resale, and on a large number of these sales respondent paid, granted or allowed, and is now paying, granting or a.llowing to the,se brokers and other direct buyers on their purchases, a eommission, brokerage, or other compensation, or an allowance or discount in heu thereof, in connection therewith. PAR. 5. The acts and practices of respondent, as above alleged and uescribed, are in 1'violation of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (FS.C. Title 15 , Section 13). J1fr. Oecil G. Niles find Jit. EnJest G. Brwncs for the Commission. Respondent, for itself.

INITIAL DEC1SlOX BY ..\.BXETI E. I..rPSCO)IB, IIEARIXG EX \1IIXEH The complaint hfl"pin was issued on .June 27, ID60, charging 11espondent ,with violation of 2(c) of the Clayton Act, as amended by paying, granting-, or allowing commission, brokerage, compensa- 60n, or an allowance or discount in beu thereof. to certain of its brokers and direct buyers, on purchases for their o\vn account for resale.

Thereafter, on .January 4 , 10EH, Respondent and counsel supporting the complaint herein e,entered into an Agreement Containing Consent Order To Cease And Desist, which was approved1 by the Director and Associate Director of the Commission s Bureau of Litigation and thermlfter, on January 9, 1961, submitted to the Hearing Examiner for consideration. Attached to and made a part of the agreement is a stipulation entered into by the same parties for the purpose of making clear be,yond any possible doubt the intent of the complaint and of the proposed order to cease and desist. The agreement identifies Respondent Be.n Hill Griffn, Inc. as a Florida corporation, with its offce and principal place of business located in Frostproof Florida, with mailing address as Post Notice Box 127, Frostproof, FJol'ida.

Respondent admits an the jllrisdietionaJ facts alleged in the complaint. and agrees that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been rluly made in accordance with suen allegations.

HILL GRIFFIN, IXC, 901 899 Decision Respondent waives any further procedure before the Hea,ring Examiner and the Commission; the making of findings of fact and ,conclusions of law; and a1l of the rights it may have to challenge DT contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with the agreement. All parties agree that the record on which the initial decision and t.he decision of the Commission shall be based shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement; that the order to cease and desist, as contained in the agreement when jt shall have become" part of the dccision 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 order; that the complaint herein ma.y be used in construing the terms of said or(le1'; and t1Htt the agreement is for settlement purposes only flncl does not const.itnte an admit sion by Respondent that. :it has violaterl the 111"\'1 as alleged in the compla.int. After consideration of the allegations of the complaint, and the provisions of the agrpement and the proposed order, the Hearing Exftminer is of the opinion that such order constitutes a satisfactory disposition of this proce,eding. Accordingly, in consonance with the terms of tlle aforesaid agreement, the hearing Examiner accepts the Agrecment Containing Consent. Order To Cease And Desist; finds that the Commission has jurisdiction over the Respondent and over its acts and practj( es as alleged in the compla.1nt; and finds that this proceeding is in the public interest. Therefore It is oTdcTCd That the Hesponclent, Ben lIill Griffn, Inc. , a co1'ponttion, and its offcers, agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the sale of citrus fruit or fruit products in commerce, as "commerce is defined in the aforesflic1 Cla,yton Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

Pa,ying, granting or allowing, directly or indirectly, to any buyer or to anyone acting for or in behalf of, or who is subject to the direct or indirect control of such buyer, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensfttioll, or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof, upon or in connection with the sale of citrus fruit or fruit products to slh h buyer for his own account. DECISION OF THE CO I1\ISSION AXD ORDER TO Fll"E REPORT OF COMPLIANCE The Commission having now determined that the hearing examiner s initial deeision, filed January 17, 1961, is adequate.e and appropriate to dispose of this proceeding:

It is ordered That. said decision be, and it hereby is, adopted as the dpclsion of the Commission.

902 FEDERAL TRADE CO)VL\IISSIO DECISIONS Complaint 58 :B .'r. It;8 further ol'dated That the respondent shad, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, fiJe 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 contained in the aforesaid initial decision.