Tucker Furs, Inc.

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

In THe Matrer or TUCKER FURS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC,, IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FED- ERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-55.__Complaint, Dec. 27, 1961—Decision, Dec. 27, 1961 Consent order requiring Chicago furriers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to show on invoices the true animal name of the tur in a fur product and the country of origin of imported furs, and to disclose when fur was artificially colored; and failing to maintain adequate records as a basis for price and value claims made in connection with their Incentive Award Programs whereby they advertised certain fur products for use by business firms as incentive awards to employees. 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 Tucker Furs, Inc., a corporation, and Morris Tucker, individually and as an oflicer of said corporation, hereinatter 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: Paracrary 1. Tucker Furs, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Hlinois and its office and principal place of business located at 108 North State Street, Chicago, Illinois.

Morris Tucker is President of the said corporate respondent and controls, directs and formulates the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. His office and principal place of business is the same as that of the said corporate respondent. Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in com- Complaint 59 F.T.C.

merce, of fur products; and have manufactured for sale, sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which has 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 invoiced by the respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were invoices pertaining to such fur products which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored when such was the fact.

3. To show the country of origin of the imported furs used in the fur product.

Par. 4. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and RegulJations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. Par. 5. Respondents’ advertised fur products in connection with Incentive Award Programs whereby respondents advertised and offered for sale certain fur products for use by business concerns as Incentive Awards to employees. Among and included in the advertisements, as aforesaid, but not limited thereto, were letters and brochures which were circulated in the State of I]linois and various other States of the United States.

Respondents in advertising fur products for sale as aforesaid, made claims and representations respecting prices and values of fur products. Said representations were of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act. Respondents in making such claims and representations failed to maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations were based in violation of Rule 44(e) of said Rules and Regulations.

Par. 6. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the TUCKER FURS, INC., ET AL. 1451 1449 Order Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practives and unfair methods of competition in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of t the. Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement js for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission’s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts ‘same, Issues its complaint; in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order :

1. Respondent. Tucker Furs, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under ‘and by virtue of the laws of the State of “THlinois with its office and principal place of business located at 108 North State Street, Chicago, Illinois. Respondent Morris Tucker is president of said corporation and his address is the same as that of said corporation. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered, That Tucker Furs, Inc., a corporation, and Morris ‘Tucker, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, or manufacture for introduction, 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, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in whole or in part of Complaint 59 F-T.C.

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 invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

B. Setting forth information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

2. Making claims and representations of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act unless there are maintained by respondents full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based. It is further ordered, That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detai] the manner and form in which they have complied with this order.