Gruskin & Feldman, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF GRL'SKIN & FELDMAN, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLA TION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COM)/ISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket .t41. Compla Nov. 1.968-Decisi:on, Nov. , 1968 Consent order requiring a New York City fur manufacturer to cease misbranding and falsely invoicing its fur products. COMPLAINT rursuant 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 Gruskin & Feldman, Inc. , a corporation, and Jack Gruskin and Milton Feldman, 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 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 Gruskin & Feldman, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. Respondents Jack Gruskin and Milton Feldman are offcers of said corporation. They formulate, direct and control the policies acts and practices of the said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set forth, Respondents are manufacturers of fur products with their office and principal place of business located at 330 Seventh Avenue New York, New York.

Complaint 74 F.

PAR. 2. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been 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 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 falsely and deceptively labeled or otherwise falsely or deceptively identified with respect to the name of the country of origin of furs contained in such fur products, in violation of Section 4 (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto were fur products labeled to show the country of origin of furs used in such fur products as Norway when the country of origin of such furs was, in fact, Poland.

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: 1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in such fur products.

2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

3. To show the country of origin of the imported furs contained in the fur products.

PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that labels attached thereto, set forth the name of an animal other than the name of the animal that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 4 (3) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

PAR. 6. 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:

GRUSKIN & FELDMAN , INC. , ET AL. 1137 1135 Complaint (a) Sample fur products used to promote or effect sales of fur products were not labeled to show the information required under the said Act and Regulations, in violation of Rule 33 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) Required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 7. 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 such fur products.

2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

3. To show the country of origin of imported fur used in any such fur product.

PAR. 8. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced with respect to the name of the country of origin of imported furs used in such fur products, in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products invoiced to show the name of the country of origin of furs contained in such fur products as Norway when the country of origin of such furs was, in fact Poland.

PAR. 9. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in that respondents set forth on invoices pertaining to fur products the name of an animal other than the name of the animal that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAR. 10. 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 following respects: (a) Information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth on invoices in abbreviated form in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. Decision and Order 74 F. (b) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations, PAR. 11, 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 methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investig-ation 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 Texties 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 and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and 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 settement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and other provisions as required by the Commission s Rules; and The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and having determined that it had reason to believe that the respondents have violated thc said Acts, and that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in 92. 34 (b) of its Ru les, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Cruskin & Feldman, 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 330 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York. Respondents Jack Cruskin and Milon Feldman are offcers of said corporation and their address is the same as that of said corporation.

GRUSKIN & FELDMAN, INC. , ET AL. 1139 1135 Decision and Order 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 Gruskin & Feldman, Inc. , a corporation, and its offcers, and Jack Gruskin and Milon Feldman, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with thc 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 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 any fur product by:

1. Falsely or deceptively labeling- or otherwise identifying such fur product as to the country of origin of furs contained in such fur product.

2. 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. 3. Setting forth on a label affxed to such fur product the name or names of any animal or animals other than the name of the animal which produced the fur contained in the fur product as specified in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations.

4. Failing to affx a label to any such fur product used as a sample to promote or effect sales of fur products showing in words and in 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 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

5. Failing to set forth on a label the item number or mark assigned to such fur product.

, .

Complaint 74 F. T.

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 an the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Misrepresenting in any manner on an invoice, directly or by implkation, the country of origin of the fur contained in such fur product.

3. Setting forth on an invoice pertaining to such fur product the name or names of any animal or animals other than the name of the animal producing the fur contained in the fur product as specified in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations.

4. 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.

5. Failing to set forth on an invoice the item number or mark assig-ned to such fur product.

It is further ordered That the respondent corporation shan forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its operating divisions.

It is jUTtheT ordered That the respondents herein shan, 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.