Debutante Furs, Inc.

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

In the Matrrer or DEBUTANTE FURS, INC., TRADING AS SCHIAPARELLI FURS ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-252. Complaint, Oct. 11, 1962—Decision, Oct. 11, 1962 Consent.order requiring manufacturing furriers in New York City to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by labeling and invoicing as “natural”, fur that was artificially colored, and failing to disclose on labels and invoices when fur products contained artificially colored fur. Complaint 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 Debutante Furs, Inc., a corporation trading under its own name and as Schiaparelli Furs, and Louis Brown, and Harry Brown, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter 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: ParacrapyH 1. Respondent Debutante Furs, 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 805 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. Individual respondents Louis Brown and Harry Brown are officers of the said corporate respondent and control, direct and formulate the DEBUTANTE FURS, INC., ET AL. 1005 1004 ; Complaint acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. Their office and principal place of business is the same as that of the said corporate respondent.

Respondents are manufacturers of fur products. 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 transporation and distribution, in commerce, 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 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 falsely and deceptively labeled or otherwise falsely and deceptively identified in that the said fur products were labeled to show that the fur contained therein was natural, when in fact such fur was pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Section 4(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Par. 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 Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products with labels which failed to show that the fur contained in the fur products was pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact. Par. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in that said fur products were invoiced to show that the fur contained therein was natural, when in fact such fur was pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Section 5(b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Par. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in that they were not invoiced as required under the provisions of 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 products, but not limited thereto, were fur products covered by invoices which failed to disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was pointed, Decision and Order 61 F.T.C.

bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

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 Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices 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 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 respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement is 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 Debutante Furs, 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 805 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. Respondents Louis Brown and Harry Brown are officers of the said corporation and their 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 respondents Debutante Furs, Inc., a corporation trading under its own name or as Schiaparelli Furs or under any other tradename, and its officers and Louis Brown and Harry Brown, DEBUTANTE FURS, INC., ET AL. 1007 1004 Decision and Order individually and as officers 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 any fur product; or in connection with the sale, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, of any fur product which has been 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. Misbranding fur products by:

A. Representing directly or by implication on labels that the fur contained in fur products is natural, when such fur is pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

B. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Representing, directly or by implication, on invoices that the fur contained in fur products is natural when such fur is pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

B. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing all the information required to be disclosed by each of the ‘subsections of Section tb) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

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 detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. Complaint 61 F.T.C.