David Gottesman trading as Gottesman Company

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

IN THE MATTER OF DAVID GOTTESMAN TRADING AS GOTTESMAK COMPANY CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-118U. Complaint, iUa?'. 1967-Decisiun Mat. 1907 Consent order requiring a New York City wholesale furrier to cease misbranding- and falsely invoicing its hi' products. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Produc.ts Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that David Gottesman, an individual trading as Gottesman Company, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has 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: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent David Gottesman is an individual trading as Gottesman Company.

Respondent is a wholesaler of fur products with his offce and principal place of business located at 37 West 39th Street, New York, :: ew York.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9 , 1952, respondent has been and is now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the bansportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and has sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which 304 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO:- DECISIONS Complaint 71 F.

have been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce fuy 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: J. To show that the fur products contained or were composed of used fur, when such was the fact.

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: (a) 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 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29 (b) of said Rules and Regulations. (c) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of said Hules and Regulations. PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondent in that they we,"e 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 that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

GOTTESMAN CO. 305 303 Decision and Order PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the fonowing respects: (a) The term j'natural" was not used on invoices to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artiliciaDy colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) 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 respondent, as herein aDeged, 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.

DECISIO D ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondent named in the caption hereof, and the respondent 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 respondent with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and The respondent and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondent of aD the jurisdictional 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 respondent that the law has been violated as aDeged in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having reason to believe that the respondent has 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 fonowing jurisdictional findings, and enters the fonowing order: 1. Respondent David Gottesman is an individual trading Gottesman Company, with his offce and principal place of business located at 37 West 39th Street, New York, :'ew York. 306 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO:, DECISIONS Dccision and Order 71 F'. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subiect matter of this proceeding and of the respondent, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDEI( It is ordered That respondent David Gottesman, an individual trading as Gottesman Company' 01' HYlY other name, and respondenfs representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the 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, 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' any fur product by:

1. Failing to affx a label to such fur product 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 " natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on a label under the Fur Products Labelmg Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated theTeum1er to describe such fur nroduct which is not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

3. Setting forth information reqaired under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting on a label affixed to such fur product.

4. Failing to set forth information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereundel' on a label in the sequence required by Rule BO of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

B. Falsely or deceptively invoicing any fur product by: 1. Failing to furnish an invoice, as the term "invoice is defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information re- FIRST FEDERAL COKSTRUCTION CO. , INC. , ET AL. 307 303 Complaint quired to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Failing to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on an invoice under the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe such fur product which is not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

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

It ':s further ordered That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which he has complied with this order.