Hans Bros., Inc., et al.

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

have c01l1plied with the order to cease and desist. IN TUB l\lA ITER OF HAXS BROS., IXC., ET AL.

ORDER: ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED YIOLATIOX OF THE Jn::ERAL TRDE COMl\fISSIQN AXD THE FUR PROD"GCTS Lli.BELIXG ACTS Docket 84-44. Complaint, Oct. 1961-Decision, Jiar. 14, 1.92 Order requiring :\TC\V York City furriers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failng to disclose on labels find invoices the names of animals producing the fur in certain fur products; faning to disclose on invoices the country of origin of import.ed furs; setting forth on invoices the name of an animal other than that. which produced a fur, such as "IYllXdyed fox; and furnishing false guaranties that cert.ain of their fur products were not misbranded, falsely ill'oiced, or falsely advertised. CO::UPLAI:-n Pursuant to the prov isions or the Federa.l Tro.cle Commission Act and the Fur llroclucts Labeling Act, and by virtue or the authority , HA1VS BROS. ) INC. , ET AL. 537 536 Complaint vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Hans Bros., Inc., a corporation, and :Ylax Hans and Harr Hans, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and Jack :Hans, individually, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have vio lated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promnlgated 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:

PARAGRAPH 1. Hails Bros., Inc.; is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State ew York with its offce and principal place of business located at 333 Seventh Avenue, New York l\Iax Hans and I-Iarry I-Ians are offcers and ack Hans is offce manager of the said corporate respondent and control, formulate and direct thc acts, practices and policies ofthe said corporate respondent. Their offce 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 commerce of fur products; a,nd 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 had been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce fur and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the RuJcs and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products with labels which failed to disclose the name or names (as set forth in the Fur Products ame Guide) of the animal or animltls that produced the fur.

PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products -were falsely and deceptively invoiced by rcsponc1ellts in that they ,,,ere not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur prod. ucts, but not limit.ed thereto, were invoices perta.ining to such fur products which failed:

538 FE.DERAL TRADE COMMISSrOK DECISIONS Initial Decision 60 F.

1. To disclose the name or names (as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide) of the animal or animals that produced the fur; 2. To disclose the name of the cOlmtry of origin of imported furs used in the fur products.

PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products "ere falsely and deceptively invoiced in that respondents set forth on invoices pertaining to fur products the name of an animal other than the name of the ani1nal that produced the fnr in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Among such invoices, but not limited thereto, were fur products invoiced as "lynx-dyed fox PAR. 6. The respondents furnished false guaranties that certain their fur products were not misbranded, falsely invoiced, or falsely advertised, ""hen respondents in furnishing such guaranties had reason to believe the fur products so falsely guarantied would be introduced, sold, transported and distributed in commerce, in violation of Section 10 (b) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 7. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Hegulations promulgated thereunder and constitute uniair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

iJr. Robert IV. Lowthian supporting the complaint. of ew York 311' . Jlax Hans 1111'. Har-ry Ilans and 1111'. Jack llans prose.

INITL\L DECISION BY 'VILLIAJ\ K. JACKSOX : I-IEAilXG E:'LDIINER This proceeding wa,s brought pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder by the issuance of a complaint on October 3 , 1961 , charging the above-named corporate respondent and the individual respondents ,, ith viohtions of both ads by misbranding, falsely and deceptively invoicing and furnishing false guarantees of their fur products.

By amended answer filed K ovember 28, 1961, the corporate and individual respondents admitted the truth of an the material anegations of the complaint and waived any hearings in the matter. By order dated IS ovember 30, 1961, the examiner afforded the parties an opportunity to file proposed fmdings of fact ,md conclusions of law by Tanuary 2, 1962. Counsel in support of the complaint filed proposed findings of fact and conclusions on December 12, 1961. Respondents did not avail themselves of the opportunity. \ , , HANS BROS. , IXC. , ET AL. 539 536 Initial Decision Based upon the allegations of the complaint, the amended answer admitting the material allegations of the complaint, and after giving consideration to the proposed findings and conclusions submitted by counsel in support of the complaint; the hearing examiner makes the following findings as to the facts, conclusions drawn therefrom and order.

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent Hans Bros., Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and principal place of blLiness located at 333 SevcnthAvenue, "'ew York, N.

2. The individual respondents Max Hans and Harry Hans are officers, and Jack IIans is offce manager of the said corporate respondent and they control, formulate and direct the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. Their offce and principal place of business is the same as that of the said corporate respondent. 3. Subsequent to the efiective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act OIl August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into coit11erce, 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 COITncrce 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 had been shipped and received in COITncrcc, as the tenus "commerce fui' and " fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act.

4. Certain of said fur products \were misbranded, in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Hules and Hegulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products were fur products with labels which failed to disclose the n:nne or nan1es (as set forth in the Fur Products N nme Guide) of the animal or animals that produced the fur. 5. Cert.ain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by respondents, in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations prolTlllgatec1 thereunder. Among such fnJse1y and deceptively invoiced fur products re invoices pertaining to such fu!' products which faded: (a) To c1Lsclose the mUTle or names (as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide) of the animal or animal.1 that produced the fur; , 540 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSrOK DECISIO:YS Initial Decision 60 F.

(b) To disclose the name of the country of origin of imported furs used in the fur products.

6. 'Certain of said fur products ,were falsely and deceptively invoiced in that respondents set forth on invoices pertaining to fur products the mune of an animal other than the name of the animal that pro dl1ced the fur in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Among such invoices "\ycre fur products invoiced as lynx-dyed fox 7. The respondents furnished false guarantees t,hat certain of their fllr products 'v ere not misbranded, falsely invoiced, or falsely adver tised, ,,,hen respondents, in furnishing such guarantees, had reason to believe the fur products so falsely guaranteed -would be introduced sold, transported and distributed in commerce in violation of Section 10 (b) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

CQXCLeSIOXS 1. The Fede.ral Trade C0I111nission has jurisdiction of and over respondents and the subject matter of this proceeding. 2. The complaint herein states a cause of action, and this proceeding is in the public interest.

3. The aforesaid acts and practices of the respondents in misbrflnding, falsely and deceptively invoicing rind furnishing false guarantees of their fur products, as hereinabove found, \Were in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Hules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constituted unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce, within the intent ancllneaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

ORDER It is ordered That Hans Bros., Inc., a corporation, and Iax Hans and Harry 1-Ians, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and .Tack loans, individually and as offce manager of the said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection 'with the introduction, manufacture for introduction, 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 saJe, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in ' whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce. as "commerce fur" and fur products:' are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act do forth- Tfith cease and desist from:

1. Jlfjsbranding fur products by:

BERGER, SAUL & GARFUNKEL Fens. , Tl\'" , ET AL. 541 536 Syllabus A. Failing to affx labcls to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to bc disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Falsely or dcceptiveJy invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products invoices showing all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsectlons of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. B. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products the name or name.s of any animal or animals other than the name of the animal producing the fur contained in the fur product as specified in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations.

3. Furnishing false guarantees that fur or fur products arc not misbranded, falsely advertised or falscJy invoiced under the provisiolls of the Fur Products Labeling Act, when there is reason to believe that such fur or fur products so falsely guaranteed may be introduced into or sold, transported or distributed in commerce. DECISION OF THE COJnnS8IO AXD ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF CO)IPJ.IANCE Pursuant to Section 4.19 of the Commission s Rules of Practice, effective July 21, 1961, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall on the 14th day of March 1962, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly:

It -is o"dered 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 detail the manner and form in which they have complied ''with the order to cease and desist.