Cotton City Wash Frocks Inc.

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

IN THE )LATTER OF COTTON CITY WASH FROCKS INC. Jet AL.

CONSENT ORDER , ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOL \Tlon OF THE FEDERAL 'I.ADE COl\nIISSION A!-'D TBE TEXTILE FIBER I'RODUCTS IDEXTI- FIOATION ACTS Docket C-7f;1. Complaint, June 196 JJecr8ion, JWIC , 196:' Con ent orcler l"'(luil'ng nwunfactll' C1'8 in New York City ancl IIal'bsYile, S. to cease violating the Textile Fiber Products Identifcation Act by such In' aetices as labeling as "All Cotton, textile fiber products \which were composed of rayon and linen, and labeling as 100% Cotton, products containing substantial quantities of triacetate as well as cotton; failng to label textie fiber products with the true generic name of the fiber and the percentage thereof present; failing to maintain proper records showing the fiber content of their products; furnishing false guaranties that their produets were not misbranded; and failng to label samples or S\Yfltc!1es with required information.

COMPL.\IXT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Textile Fiber Products lclentific,ltion Act, and by virt.ue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission ha.ving reason to believe that Cotton Cit.y 'Vash Froc.ks, Inc., a corporation, and Patti Gree.ue., Inc., a. corporation and Alfred Greene, inclividually and as all offcer of said corporations, and Hartsville j)Ianufacturing Company, Inc. , a corporation, and Alfred Greene and "\Vayne 11. Duval, individually and as offcers or said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of such Acts and the Rules and Regulations under' the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act., a.nd 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: PAR!\.GRAPII- 1. Respondent Cotton City ,VasIl Frocks, Inc. , is n. corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la WE; of the Commonwealth of :JIassachusetls. Respondent Pat6 Greene, Inc., is it corporation, organized existillg and doing business under and by virtue of the Ia"\y;; or the Com mon wealth of JJassachnsetts.

Individual respondent Alfred Greene is an offcer of the aforementioned c.corporate respondents and controls, directs and iormulates t.he acts, practices and policies of the, corpoI'nte respondents. Respondents are engaged in manufacturing and selling to retailers articles of "\\eftI'ing apparel. The offce and pl'jncipal place of business of these l'eBpondents is located at 1:350 Broadway, New York, New York. , \\ 1046 FEDERAL TRADE CO 2\IISSION DECISIONS Complaint G5 F.

Respondent HartsviIIe :.'fanufacturing Company, Inc. , is a. corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of South Carolina. Individual respondents Alfred Greene and .Wayne H. Duval are offcers of this corporate respondent and eentrol, direct and formulate the acts, practices and policies of the corporate respondent. The offce and principal place of business of Hartsvil1e Manufacturing Comp"ny, Inc., and 'Wayne H. Duval is located at South Fifth Street, Hartsvil1e, South Carolina. PAR. 2. Subsequent to the ejJective date of the Textile Fiber Products Iclentific.ation Act on 1:arch 3, 1960, respondents have been and a.re now engaged in the introduction, delivery for introduction, saJe, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and can sing to be transported in commerce, and in the. importation into the United Stotes, of textile fiber products; and have sold, offered for sale, adverti.sed, delivered, transported, and have caused to be transported, textile fiber produds which have been advertised and offered for sale in commerce. ; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered, transported, and caused to be transported after shipment in commerce, tc::dile fiber products, either in their original state or ccmtained in other textile fiber products, fls tll(, terms "r.commerce n(l textile f,ber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identifcation Act.

PAR. :1. Certain of said textile fiber products were ml:obrancled by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4(a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptively sunnped, tagged, labeled, invoiced, advertised or otherwise identified as to the mune or amount of constit.uent fibers contained therein. nlOng such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereere textile libel' products with labels which: 1. Set forth the fiber content as "Alj Cotton, whereas, in truth and in fact, said product eont.ained no cotton and was instead composed of ra.yon and linen.

2. Set forth fiber content as "100% Cotton, whereas, in truth and in fact said product contained substantial quantities of triacetate. as well as cotton.

PAR. 4. Certain of said textile fiber products were further misbranded by respondents in that they were not. stanlped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified as required under the. provisions of Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and in tho Tflanner and f0I111 as prescribed by the Hules and Regulations pro. mulgate-e under said Act.

COTTON CITY WASH FROCKS, li, ET AL. 1047 1045 Decision and Ordter Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were textile fiber products with hrbels which failed : 1. To disclose the true generic name of the fiber present; and 2. To disclose the percentage of such fibers. PAR. 5. Respondents named in PRragraph One ha.vc failed to ff' aintain proper records showing the fiber content of the textile fiber products manufactured by them, in violation of Section 6 (a) of the Textile Fiber Pmducts Identification Act and Rule ag of the Regulations 1'1'0mulgated thereunder.

PAR. 6. Respondents have furnished false. guaranties that their textile fiber products ",-ere not. misbrnnclecl, in violation of Section 10 of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. PAR. 7. Certain of said textile fiber products ,were misbrrtnc1ec1 in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act in that they ,ycre not labeled ill accordance with the. Rules and R.egulat ions prollmlgate.c thereunder in that sar:nples swatches 01' spceimeJl of textile fiber products used to promote or effect sn.le of sllch textile fiber products, ,were not labeled to show their re pect.i\-c fiber contents and other required information, in violation of Ence 21(n) of the a-fon'said Hnk. , lln(l Rc' gulationc:

P AH. 8. The acts and practices of respondents, as set forth here ,were in violation of the Textile Fiber Produc-ts Identification Act find the Hules and Regulations promulgated thereunder; and canst-itnt-ed nd now constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, in cohn11crce, "within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISIO AND Onder The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint chaTging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and the respondents having been se.rvecl 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 therea.after executcd a.n agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondents of a11 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 Jaw has been violated as set forth in su(:h complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and 1048 FEDERAL TRADE CO:-H\'IISSION DECISIONS D(':i.'-ion and Olc1r 65 P. The Commission, ha.ving considered the agreement, hereby accepts 8(1me, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes t.he following j nrisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Cotton City IV ash Frocks, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and. by virtue or the la,,-s or the Commonwea.lth of l\lassachusetts, with its offce a.nd principaj place of business at 1350 Broadway, in the city of Xew York, State of :'ew York.

Respondent, Patti Greene, Inc., is a. corporation organized, existing and doing bu.siness under and by virtue of the laws of the COllmon alth or Iassachusetts, with jts offce and principal place or business at 1350 Broadway, in the city of Kew York, State of New York. Hesponclent, I-IartsviJle :Mallufacturing Company, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of South Carolina, with its offce and principal plnee of business at South Fifth Street, in the city or Hartsvile, State of South Carolina.

pOllclent Alfred Greene is an offcer of all of the n,bove corpora tiol1s. and his address is 1350 Broad,,-ay, in the city OT Xew Yorl-; State of ew York.

Hesponde,nt V: ayne 11. Dtwal is an offcer of Hartsyille :Manufac tnring Company, Inc. , 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 i8 OI'dercd That respondents Cotton City 'Wash Frocks, Inc., a corporation, and l atti Greene, Inc., a corporation and Alfred Greene, inc1h-idually and as an offcer of said corporations, and Hartsville ::\Ianufflctul'ing Company, Inc., a corporation and .cUfred Greene and \Vayne I-I. Duval, individually and as offcers of said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device in connection with the introduction, delivery for introduction, sale, advertising, or offering for sale, in commerce, or transportation or causing to be transported in commerce, 01' the importation into the Cnited States of any textile fiber product; or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, acl- YCl'tising, delivery, transportation, or causing to be transported, of llny textile fiber product which has been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; or in c.onneetion with the sale, offering for sale, advertising, delivery, transportation. or causing to be transported LUCIEN PICCARD WATCH CORP. ET AL. 1049 1045 Syllabus after shipment in commerce, of any textile fiber product, whether in its original state or contained in other textile fiber products, as the terms "commerce" and "textile fiber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. Misbranding textile fiber products by:

1. Falsely Or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, invoicing, advertising or otherwise identifying such products as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein. 2. Failing to affx labels to such textile fiber products showing each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. 3. Failing to affx labe.!s showing the respective fiber content and other required information to samp.!e;, swatches and specimens of textile fiber products subject to the aforesaid Act which arc used to promote or effect sales of such textile fiber products.

B. Failing to maintain and preserve for at least three years proper records showing the fiber content of texti.!e fiber products manufactured by them, as required by Section 6 of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and Ru.!e 39 of the Regu.!ations promulgated therelmder.

O. Furnishing false guaranties that textile fiber products are not misbranded or otherwise misrepresented under the provisions of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. It is f,,,.ther O1'dered That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Oommission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order.