Dubrowsky & Joseph, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF DUBROWSKY & JOSEPH, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF HE FEDERAL TRADE COM MISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1166. Complaint, Feb. 7, 1967-Decision, Feb. 1967 Consent order requiring a New York City manufacturer of ladies' coats to cease misbranding the fiber content of interlinings of its wool coats, and failing to comply with other statutory requirements. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 , and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Dubrowsky & Joseph, Inc., a corporation, and Morris Dubrowsky, Morris Joseph, Irving Dubrowsky and Rubin Joseph, 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 Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, 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. Respondent Dubrowsky & Joseph, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. Individual respondents Morris Dubrowsky, Morris Joseph Irving Dubrowsky and Rubin Joseph are offcers of said corporation. They are responsible for and formulate the. acts, practices and politics of said corporation, including the acts and practices hereinafter referred to.

Respondents are manufacturers of wool products (ladies coats) with their offce and principal place of business located at 520 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, respondents have manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into commerce, sold, trans- , and offeredported, distributed, delivered for shipment, shipped for sale, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said Act, wool products as "wool product" is defined therein. DUBROWSKY & JOSEPH , INC. , ET AL.

Decision and Order PAR. 3. Certain of said wool products were misbranded within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, 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 ladies coats stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified as containing 100% wool interlining, whereas in truth and fact, such interlining contained substantially different amounts of fibers than represented.

PAR. 4. 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 prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto, was a wool product, namely a ladies coat, with a label on or affxed thereto, which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the wool product, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight, of (1) wool; (2) reprocessed wool; (3) reused wool; (4) each fiber other than wool, when said perc:entage by weight of such fiber was 5 percentage or more; (5) the aggregate of all other fibers. PAR. 5. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth above 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 methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices, in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISI01i 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 thc Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939; and Order 71 F.

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 aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that the law has been violated 2.8 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 said Acts, and having determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby iseues its complaint, accepts said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the follo\ving order: 1. Respondent Dubrowsky & Joseph, 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 busineos located at 520 Eighth Avenue, Kew York, New York. Respondents Morris Dubrowsky, Iorris Joseph, Irving Dubrowsky and Rubin Joseph are offcers of said corporation and their address is the same as that of said corpor2tion. 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 i, ordered, That Dubrowsky & Joseph, Inc. , a corporation and its offcers, and Morris Dubrowsky, !Vorris Joseph, Irving Dubrowsky and Rubin Joseph, 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, distribu- , of \\'001tion, delivery for shipment or shipment, in commerce products, as "commerce " and "wool product" are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 , do fo"thwith cease and desist from misbranding such products by: 1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, 01' otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of the constituent llbers contained therein. 2. Failing to securely affx to, or place un, each such product a stamp, tag, label, 01' other meallS of identification showing in a clear and conspicuous manner each element of PANAT JEWELRY CO. , INC. , ET AL.

Complaint information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. It is JUTther o1'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 this order.