B. Gertz, Inc.

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

In tee Matter oF B. GERTZ, INC.

‘CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 8351. Complaint, Apr. 13, 1961—Decision, Aug. 22, 1961 ‘Consent order requiring a furrier in Jamaica, Long Island, N.Y., to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to disclose, in advertisjing in newspapers, the name of the animal producing certain fur and setting forth therein the name of another animal. ComMPLAINT 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 B. Gertz, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has 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: ParacrapH 1. Respondent B. Gertz, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business located at 162-10 Jamaica Avenue, Jamaica, Long Island, New York.

Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondent has been and is now engaged in the 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 has 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. 8. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that respondent. advertised fur products which were made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce as the terms “fur”, “fur product” and “commerce” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act and which advertisements were not in Decision 59 F.T.C.

accordance with the provisions of Section 5(a) of the said Act and the Rules and Regulations 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. Par. 4. Among and included in the advertisements, as aforesaid,,. but not limited thereto were advertisements of respondent, which appeared in issues of Newsday, a Long Island newspaper published in the State of New York.

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 the fur contained in the fur product as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide in violation of Section 5(a) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

(b) Set forth the name of an animal other than the name of the animal that produced the fur in violation of Section 5(a)(5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Par. 5. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Mr. Harry i. Middleton, Jr., supporting the complaint. Respondent, pro se.

Init1at Decision sy Joun Lewis, Hearing Examiner The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against the above-named respondent on April 18, 1961, charging it with having violated the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations issued thereunder, and the Federal Trade Commission Act, through the false and deceptive advertising of certain fur products. After being served with said complaint, respondent appeared and entered into an agreement, dated June 9, 1961, containing a consent. order to cease and desist purporting to dispose of all of this proceeding as to all parties. Said agreement, which has been signed by respondent and by counsel supporting the complaint. and approved by the Acting Director and Assistant Director of the Commission’s Bureau of Litigation, has been submitted to the abovenamed hearing examiner for his consideration, in accordance with Section 3.25 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings.

B. GERTZ, INC. 295 293 Order Respondent pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, has admitted all the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint and agreed that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been duly made in accordance with such allegations. Said agreement further provides that respondent waives any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law 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 such agreement. It has been agreed that the order to cease and desist issued in accordance with said agreement shall have the same force 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 that said 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.

This proceeding having now come on for final consideration on the complaint and the aforesaid agreement containing consent order, and it appearing that the order provided for in said agreement covers all of the allegations of the complaint and provides for an appropriate disposition of this proceeding as to all parties, said agreement is hereby accepted and is ordered 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 following jurisdictional findings and order: 1. Respondent B. Gertz, Inc. is a corporation existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business located at 162-10 Jamaica Avenue, in the City of Jamaica, Long Island, State of New York.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent hereinabove named. The complaint states a cause of action against said respondent under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Federai Trade Commission Act, and this proceeding is in the interest of the public. ORDER Tt is ordered, That B. Gertz, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and respondent’s representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the intro- Syllabus 59 F.T.C.

‘duction into commerce, or the sale, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or the 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. Falsely or deceptively advertising 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 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 under the Rules and Regulations.

B. Sets forth the name or names of any animal or animals other than the name or names specified in Section 5(a)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 22d day of August 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, 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.