LV Mar Fashions, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF LV MAR FASHIONS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO!\, THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-ille. Complaint, Sept. ige6-Decision, Sept. , 1966 Consent order requiring a New York City clothing manufacturer to cease mislJYanding its fur and wool products and falsely invoicing its fur products.

COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fur Pl"ducts Labeling Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, and by virtue of tbe authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Lu Mar Fashions, Inc. , a corporation, and Louis Marangione and William Gordon, individually and as offcers 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 the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and it appearing to the Commission that a pl"ceeding 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. Respondent Lu Mal' Fashions, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondents Louis Marangione and William Gordon are offcers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of tbe said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set fortb.

Respondents are manufacturers of fur products and wool products with their offce and principal place of business located at 265 West 37th Street, Kew York, New York. 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, advertis- LV MAR FASHIONS, INC. , ET AL. 701 700 Complaint ing, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation 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 furs which have 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 Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto were fur products with labels which failed: 1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in any such 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.

PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

1. The term "natural" was not used on labels to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(9) of said Rules and Regulations, 2. Required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 5. 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 fur products covered by invoices which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product.

2. To show the country of origin of imported furs used in fur products.

PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in Complaint 70 F. T.

that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: 1. Information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promldgated thereunder was set forth on invoices in abbreviated form in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. 2. The term "natural" was not used on invoices to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules a.nd Regulations.

3. Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. 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.

PAR. 8. Subsequent to the effective date of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, respondents have manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into commerce, sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment, shipped and offered for sale in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said Act, wool products as "wool product" is defined therein. PAR. 9. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by the respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereundel' in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified with respect to the character and amount of the constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded wool products but not limited thereto were wool products labeled or tagged by respondents as 100ro Wool, whereas in truth and in fact said pl'ducts contained substantially less than 100 % W 001.

PAR, 10. Certain of said wool products were further misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and in the manner and form as plescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto LU MAR FASHIONS , INC. , RT AL. 703 700 Decision and Order was a wool product with a label on or affxed thereto which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the said exceeding 50/0wool product, exclusive of ornamentation not the total weight, of (1) wool; (2) reprocessed wool; (3) reused wool; (4) each fiber other than wool present in the wool product when said percentage by weight of such fiber was 5% or more; and (5) the aggregate of aJl other fibers. PAR. 11. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth in Paragraphs Nine and Ten, were, and are, in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and constituted, and now constitute, unfair deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondents named in the caption hereof, and the respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued 'by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement contajning a consent order, an admission by the respondents of all the j urisdictionaJ facts set forth . in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having reason to believe that the respondents have violated the said Acts, and having determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby issues its complaint, accepts said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Lu Mar Fashions, 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 Decision and Order 70 F, business located at 265 West 37th Street in the city of N ew York State of New York.

Respondents Louis Marangione and WilJam Gordon are offcers of 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 Lu Mar Fashions, Inc. , a corpoc ration, and its offcers, and Louis Marangione and \Villiam Gordon, 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, 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; 01' in connection with the manufacture for sale, sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, of any fur product which is 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, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. Misbranding fur products by:

1. Failing to affx labels to fur products showing in words and in figures plainly legible all of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Failing to set forth the term "natmal" as part of the information required to be disclosed on labels under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

3. Failing to set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to each such fur product.

B, Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Failing to furnish invoices, as the term j' invoice " is defined in the Fm Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible al1 the information re- LU MAR FASHIONS , I:\C. , ET AL. 705 700 Decision and Order quired to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. 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.

3. Failing to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on invoices under the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

4. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number 01' mark assigned to each such fur product.

It is further ordered That respondents Lu Mar Fashions, Inc" a corporation, and its offcers, and Louis lVIarangione and \Villiam Gordon, 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 or manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution or delivery for shipment or shipment in commerce, of wool products, as "commerce" and "wool product" are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, do forthwith cease and desist from: Misbranding wool products by;

1. Falsely and deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, or otherwise identifying such products as to the character 01' amount of the constituent fibers contained therein.

2. Failing to securely affx to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label, or other means of identification showing in a clear and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. It is furthe?' 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 70 F.