Michigan Fruit Canners, Inc.

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

IN THE MA'ITER OF MICI-IIGAN FRUIT CANNERS, INC.

ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 2 ( c1) OF THE CLA YTON ACT Docket 8095. Complaint Aug. 25 1960-Decision, Sept. , 1961 of competition, com-Order dismissing without prejudice, for lack of evidence plaint charging canners of fruits and vegetables in Benton Harbor, Mich. with unlawfully discriminating among competing customers in paying promotional allowances.

COMPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that the party respondent named in the caption hereof, and hereinafter more particularly designated and described, has violated and is now vialating the provisions of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act (D. C. Title 15, Section 13), hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges with respect thereto as follows :

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent :Michigan Fruit Canners, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of :Michigan, with its office and principal place of business located at 9th &, Oak Streets, Benton Harbor, :Michigan. PAR. 2. Respondent is no\V and has been engaged in the business vegetables of many varie-selling and distributing canned fruits and ties, which it processes and cans at its plant in Benton Harbor, ~1ichigan. Respondent sells and distributes its products to wholesalers and retailers, including voluntary groups and retail chain store organizations. Respondent's sales of its products are substantial, exceeding $15 000 000 annually.

to be transported PAn. 3. Respondent sells and causes its products place of business in the State of !iichigan to cus- from its principal tomers located in other States of the United States. There has been at a11 times mentioned herein a continuous course of trade in said products in commerce, as "cO1m11erce" is defined in the Clayton Act as amended.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of its business in commerce, and particularly since 1958, respondent paid or contracted for the payment of its customers as of something of value to 0'1' for the benefit of some compensation or in consideration for services or facilities furnished or through such customers in connection with their offering for sale sale of products sold to them by respondent, and such payments were Decision 59 F.

not made available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers competing in the sale and distribution of respondents products. PAR. 5. For example, in the year 1959, respondent contracted to pay and did pay to Benner Tea Company, a retail grocery chain with. headquarters in Burlington, Iowa, the mnount of $150.00 as compensation or as an al1m,ance for advertising or other services or facilities furnished by or through Benner Tea Company in connection with its offering for sale or sale of products sold to it by respondent, Such compensation or allowance was not made available on proportionallyequal terms to all other customers competing with Benner Tea Company in the sale and distribution of products of like grade and quality purchased from respondent.

PAR, 6. The acts and practices of respondent, ns alleged, are in violation of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act.

.:11 , John Pelts for the Commission.

Bell, Boyd, 1I1a'J'shaU Lloyd by Mr. John T. Loughlin Chicago Ill., for respondent..

IXITL\L DECISION BY ~L6.URICE S, BUSH, I-IEARING EXAl\IINER This proceeding is before the hearing examiner upon motion of" counsel supporting the con~~laint to dismiss the complaint in this proceeding for the reason that after investigation, he has been unable. to develop evidence of competition among the customers of the ref;pondent sufficient to support the charges of the complaint and the hearing examiner having considered said motion and the record here.

ORDJ~n It -l.g ordered. That the complaint in this proceeding be and the s~me is hereby dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the Commission to take nny fmi,her action in the matter in the future which may be warranted by the then existing circumstfll1ces. DECISION 01;' THE CO:"'DITf;SION Pursuant to Section 3,21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice published :l\Iay 6, 1955, as amended, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 20th day of September 1961, become the decision of the Commission.

ALBIN CRUTCHFIELD 527 Complaint Ix THE ~Lt\ TTER 01-' ALBIN P. CHUTCI-IFIELD DOING BUSINESS AS ALBIN CRUTCI-IFIELD CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 2 (C) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Doc-ket 8129. Coll1pl.aint, Sept. 1960-Decfsion, Sept. ~30, 1961 Consent order requiring a Titllsvi1Je, FIn., broker of citrus fruit and produce to cease violating-Sec. 2 (c) of tile Clayton Act by accepting from Florida suppliers unl'flwful brokerflge on his O\\"n purchases for resale, such as a discount at the rate of 10 cents per 1% bushel box or a lower price reflecting such commission.

COJUPLAIXT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that the party respondent named in the caption hereof, and hereinaftm' more particularly c1eseribed, has been and is now violating the provj.sions of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (U. Title 15, Section 13), hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges with respect thereto as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Albin P. Crutchfield is an individual doing business as Albin CrutchBeld under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida, with his office and principal place of business located in Titusville, Florida, with mailing address as Post Office Box 1988, TitusviJJe, Florida.

PAR. 2. Respondent is now, and for the past several years has been, engaged pdmariJy in the. brokerage business, representing a number of packer-principals located in various sections of the United States, in connection with the. sale and distribution of citrus fruit and produce, as web as other food products, an of which are hereinafter sometimes referred to as food products. In particular, respondent represents a number of eitrns fruit paekers loc.ated in the State of Florida in the saJe and distribution of citrus frujt, for which respondent was and is paid for his services in connection therewith a brokerage or commjssion, usnaI1y at the. rate of 10 cents per 131s bushel box, or equava.lent. substantial part of respondent's business is acting in the capacity of a buying broker, purchasing c.itrus fruit and produce for his own flce-aunt for resale. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of his business for the past several years, in respresenting packer-principals, as well as when purchasing for hjs own account, respondent has, directly or indirectly, cau~ec1 such c.itrns fruit or food products, when soldoI' purchased, to Decision 59 F.

be shipped and transported from various packers' packing plants or places of business located in the State of Florida to respondent's customers located in many states other than the State of Florida. Thus for the past several years, respondent has been, and is now, engaged in a continuous course of trade in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, as amended.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of his business in commerce, as aforesaid, during the past several years, but more particularly since January 1, 1959, to the present time, respondent has made, and is now for hismaking, numerous and substantial purchases of food products own account for resale from various packers or sellers on which purchases he has received and accepted, and is now receiving and accepting, directly or indirectly, something of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or an allowance or discount in lieu thereof in connection therewith. For example, respondent has made, and is flow making, substantial purchases of citrus fruit for his own account from a number of packers located in the State of Florida, which fruit is shipped and transported to customers located outside the State Florida, and on said purchases respondent receives from the packer a brokerage or comj11ission, or a discount in lieu thereof, usually at the rate of 10 cents per 10/5 bushel box, or equivalent. In many instances respondent receives a lower price from the packer, which reflects said brokerage or commission.

PAR. 5. The acts and practices of respondent in receiving and accepting a bokerage or commission, or an allowance or discount in lieu thereof, on his own purchases, as herein alleged and described, are asin violation of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, amended (D. C. Title 15, Section 13).

DECISION AND ORDER This matter having come on to be heard by the Commission upon a record c.onsisting of the Commission s complaint charging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of subsection ( c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended, and an agreement by and bet,yeen respondent and counsel supporting the complaint, ,rhich agreement. contains an order to cease and desist, an admission by the respondent. of all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint, a statement that the, signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that he has violated the Jaw as al1egec1 in the complaint, and waivers find provisions ns required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission having considered the, agreement and order contained therein and being of the opinion that the agreement provides F. C. FORD BROKERAGE CO. 529 529 Syllabus an adequate basis for appropriate disposition of the proceeding, the agreement is hereby accepted, the following jurisdictional findings are made, and the following order is entered:

1. Respondent Albin P. Crutchfield is an individual doing business as Albin Crutchfield under find by virtue of the la,ys of the State of Florida, with his office and principal place of business located in the City of Titusville~ State of Florida, with mailing address as Post Office Box 1988, Titusville, Florida.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent. ORDER It is ordered That respondent Albin P. Crutchfield, individually and doing business as Albin Crutchfield, and respondent's agents representatives, and employees, directly or through any corporate partnership, sole proprietorship, or other device., in connection with the purchase of eitrus fruit or produce in commerce, as "cOlmnerce" is defined in the Clayton Act, ns nmende.c1, do forthwith cease. and desist from:

Receiving or accepting, directly or indirectly, from any seHer, anything ot value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or ny aHowance or discount in lieu thereof, upon or in connection "ith any purchase of citrus fruit or produce for l'espondenCs own account or where respondent is the agent, representative, or other intermediary acting for or in behalf, or is subject to the direct or indirect control of any buyer.

It 'l~s further o'lYle'j' That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commis. sion a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which he has complied with this order.