Consumer Law Library

Jeffrey Jewelry Co

Volume 17 · 17 F.T.C. 27

Citation
17 F.T.C. 27
Docket
2004
Complaint
1932-02-02
Decision
1932-09-21
Document type
consent order
Case type
consumer protection
Industry
jewelry
Outcome
consent order entered
Relief
cease_and_desist; compliance_reporting
Commission counsel
Eugene W. Burr
Respondent counsel
FrankS. Righeimer, of Chicago, Ill
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

deceptive advertisingproduct labeling

Cite this decision

Jeffrey Jewelry Co, 17 F.T.C. 27 (1932). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v017-0004

Report an error in this record (decision id v017-0004)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 1 later FTC decisions

Cites

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

IN THE MATTER OF JEFFREY JEWELRY COMPANY COMPLAINT AND ORDER. IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SE'C. II OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1914 Docket 2004. Oomp~aint, Feb. 2, 1932-order, Sept. ft, 193! Consent order requiring respondent, its agents, etc., in connection with sale in interstate commerce of jewelry, not made by hand by American Indians to cease and desist representing same as so made through tbe words " Indian " or." Navajo", or any other words, markings or labeling, or otherwise. Mr. Eugene W. Burr for the Commission.

Mr. Franks. Righeimer, of Chicago, Ill., for respondent. Complaint Acting in the public interest pursuant to the provisions of an act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes," the Federal Trade Commission charges that Jeffrey Jewelry Co., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has been and is now using unfair methods of competition in interstate commerce, in violation of the provisions of section 5 of said act, and states its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Jeffrey Jewelry Co., is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois with its factory and principal place of business located in the city of Chicago, in the State of Illinois. Respondent is now and for more than one year last past has been engaged in the manufacture of jewelry and in the sale and distribution of said jewelry in commerce between and among various States of the United States. Respondent causes its said products when sold to be shipped from its place of business in the State of Illinois to purchasers thereof located in a State or States of the United States other than the State of Illinois. In the course and conduct of its business, the respondent was at all times herein referred to in competition with other corporations and with individuals, firms, and partnerships engaged in the sale and distribution in interstate commerce of similar products.

PAR. 2. There are in the United States tribes of Indians, including especially the Navajo Indians in Arizona, who manufacture jewelry of special design designated as "Indian" or "Navajo" jewelry, which jewelry is sold to the trade and the public under such designa- Complaint 17 F.T.C. tions in interstate commerce. The value of the jewelry manufactured and sold by said Indians is substantial and the said " Indian " or "Navajo" jewelry has acquired a reputation for beauty and wearing qualities and said Indians have a valuable goodwill in the words "Indian " and "Navajo" as applied to the same. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of its business as described in paragraph 1 hereof, respondent has been and is now soliciting the sale of and selling and distributing in interstate commerce certain jewelry desGI'Iibed and advertised in advertisements, circulars, leaflets or brochures published or caused to be published, and issued or caused to be issued by it, and distributed or caused to be distributed to its customers and prospective customers located in various States of the United States. The descriptive matter in such advertisements, circulars, leaflets or brochures contained the representations (both by printed words and pictorial representations) that the said jewelry so offered for sale and sold by respondent is "Indian" jewelry or that the said jewelry so offered for sale and sold by respondent is "Navajo" jewelry, when in truth and in fact, the said jewelry is not manufactured by American Indians of any tribe, but is manufactured or fabricated by machinery in mills or factories. PAR. 4. The word "Indian" or the word" Navajo" as applied to hammered silver jewelry is understood by the purchasing public to mean and designate jewelry manufactured or fabricated by hand by American Indians.

PAR. 5. The acts and things done by respondent as hereinabove set forth have the capacity and tendency to mislead and to deceive and do mislead and deceive the purchasing public into the belief that the products manufactured and offered for sale and sold by respondent as aforesaid, are products manufactured by hand by American Indians, and to induce and have induced the purchase of such jewelry in reliance on such belief; and thereby to divert trade from and otherwise injure competitors of respondent. PAR. 6. Among the competitors of respondent are many manufacturers, dealers and distributors of jewelry who market such products under truthful representations to the purchasing and consuming public in competition with respondent and who do not use false or misleading representations of the type and character used by respondent. as hereinabove set forth.

PAR. 7. The use by respondent of the false, misleading, and deceptive representations, statements, and assertions as hereinabove t>et forth, constitutes practices or methods of competition which tend to and do (a) Prejudice and injure the public, (b) Unfairly divert JEFFREY JEWELRY CO. 29 27 Order trade from and otherwise prejudice and injure respondent's competitors, and (c) Operate as a restraint upon and a detriment to the freedom of fair and legitimate competition in the jewelry business.

PAR. 8. Said false, misleading, and deceptive acts, practices and methods of respondent under the circumstances and conditions hereinabove alleged are unlawful and constitute unfair methods of competition in conunerce within the intent and meaning of section 5 of an act of Congress entitled "An act to Create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes "ยท ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST This proceeding having come on for final hearing by the Federal Trade Commission upon the complaint and respondent's answer waiving all further proceeding and consenting that the Commission may make, enter, and serve upon it an order to cease and desist from the method or methods of competition charged in the complaint, and the Commission being fully advised in the premises, It is now ordered, That the respondent, Jeffrey Jewelry Co., a corporation, its agents, representatives, servants, and employees, in connection with the sale or offering for sale in interstate commerce of jewelry, cease and desist from representing by the words "Indian", or "Navajo", or any other words, markings, or labels, independently or in connection with any other words, phrases, or markings, or by any other means, that said jewelry is manufactured by hand by American Indians when such is not the fact. It is further ordered, That the respondent shall, within 60 days from the service upon him of a copy 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 the order herein set forth. Complaint 17 F.T.C.

← 17 F.T.C. 20 · 17 F.T.C. 30 →