A. Hollander & Son, Inc.

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

IN THE 1\fATI'ER OF A. HOLLANDER & SON, INC., ET AL.

COMPLAINT AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. II OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1914 Docket 2128. Complaint', Nov. 28, 1981,-order, June 25, 1935 • Complaint charged respondent Hollander & Son, dressers and dyers of muskrat and rabbit skins by processes which caused same to resemble appearance of dyed sealskin, respondents Jacobson Brothers, Corn & Fennlng, and Fenrab Company, engaged in purchasing such furs for dressing and dyeing by it and in selling same thereafter to garment manufacturers and fur dealers, and respondents Geller & Son, Oldman Brothers, and Abrams & Linden, engaged in purchasing such furs for dressing and dyeing by it, as aforesaid, or in purchasing such furs already thus dressed and dyed by it, from dealers therein, and in manufacturing fur garments thereof and selling same to dealers therein for resale to ultimate user purchasers, with misbranding or mislabeling and advertising falsely or misleadingly, in the respective dressing and dyeing, and selling muskrat and rabbit skins and garments made thereof, under said first-named respondent's widely advertised and featured brands, marks, and designations, which, in case of said muskrat, displayed conspicuously, words "Seal", "Hollander Seal", or "Hudson Seal", and, in case of said rabbit, words "Nubian Seal", together with words ''Dyed Muskrat" or "Dyed Cony", respectively, in such small and inconspicuous letters in relation to the others as to be unnoticeable except on close inspection, and which are repeated on garment labels and tags supplied by said first-named respondent, which, through extensive advertisements in periodicals, window displays, pamphlets, and otherwise promotes and encourages sale under its trade name, letters, marks, designations, and plan, of said muskrat and rabbit furs, thus dressed, dyed, stamped, marked, and described by 1t for the owners in ac· cordance with its agreements therewith, and of garments made thereof, thus labeled and tagged, and for the superior and more costly seal, anti which in its aforesaid practices knowingly and intentionally aided, assisted abetted, and caused such sales by its co-respondents· With result' of furnishing manufacturers and dealers, wholesale' and retail, with the means enabling them to perpetrate a fraud upon the purchasing public by representing the furs thus dressed, dyed, and stamped by said first-named respondent, and garments made thereof, as seal, and of supporting such false representations by exhibiting to customers and prospec~ive customers the marks or designations stamped thereon or the labels and tags attached thereto, supplied by It, or both, and with tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive the consuming public into the purchase of such furs and garments as and for the more pliable, durable, and costly seal, and to divert trade to them awl to dealers offering or selling such furs or garments to their customers in interstate commerce, and to retailers a Amended and supplemental.

• The order Is published as modified as of that date. Original order, not printed, was made aa ot May 16, 1935.

A. HOLLANDER & SON, INC., ET AL, 23 22 Complaint thereof, from dealers selling in such commerce fur of muskrat, rabbit, seal, or other animals, truthfully marked and described, and from manufacturers and dealers sellng in such commerce garments made from such furs, truthfully branded or described, and from their customers or vendees, the retailers; to the prejudice of the public and of said competitors. Ordered, respondents consenting, that respondents first named, and their agents, officers, etc., in connection with the dyeing or dressing, sale, offer or advertisement of dyed muskrat fur or dyed cony (rabbit) fur, in interstate commerce, cease and desist from describing furs other than by the use of the correct name of the fur as the last word in the designation thereof, and from the use of the words "Seal" or "Hudson Seal" as designations thereof, subject to permitted use thereof in an adjective sense, together with such words as "Dyed" or "Blended", as in said order tn detail set forth.

Mr. James M. Brinson for the Commission.

Leber & Ruback, of Newark, N.J., for respondents. AMENDED AND Supplemental Co:aiPLAINT • 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, having reason to believe that A. Hollander & Son, Inc., Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., B. Geller & Son, Inc., Fenrab Company, Inc., Oldman Brothers, Inc., and Abrams & Linden, Inc., have been and are using unfair methods of competition in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said Act, and it appearing to said Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its amended and supplemental complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., is now and for many years last past has been a corporation organized, existing and doing business under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal office and place of business in the city of Newark, State of New Jersey, and engaged in the business of dressing and dyeing furs, particularly muskrat fur and rabbit fur (cony). PAR. 2. Respondents, Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., B. Geller & Son, Inc., Fenrab & Company, Inc., Oldman Brothers, Inc., and Abrams & Linden, Inc., are corporations organized, existing, and doing business under the laws of the State of New York with principal offices and places of business located in New York City. Respondents, Jacobson Brothers, Inc., and Corn &,Fen· ning, Inc., have been for several years last past and now are engaged in the business of buying muskrat furs, and causing said furs to be dressed and dyed for each of said respondents, respectively, by A. 24 FEDERAL TRADE COl\LMISSION DECISIONS Complaint 21F.T.C.

Hollander & Son, Inc., and in the sale of said dressed and dyed furs to manufacturers of fur garments and dealers in furs. Said respondents, in connection with the sale of said dressed and dyed furs, cause same when sold to be transported to the purchasers thereof located in the city of New York, State of New York, and States of the United States other than the State of New Yo~k. Respondent, B. Geller & Son, Inc., has been and is engaged in the business of buying furs, particularly muskrat furs, and causing such muskrat furs to be dressed and dyed for it by respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., and also of buying muskrat furs which have been dressed and dyed by respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., from furriers or dealers in such furs, and in the manufacture of garments made from said dressed and dyed muskrat furs and in the sale of said garments to dealers for resale to ultimate user purchasers and of causing said garments, when so sold, to be transported to the purchasers thereof located in the city of New York, State o£ New York, and in States of the United States other than the State o£ New York. Respondent, Fenrab Company, Inc., has been and is engaged in the business of buying rabbit furs (cony) and of causing said furs to be dressed and dyed for it by respondent, A. Hollander & Son. ' Inc., and in the sale of said dressed and dyed furs to dealers in furs and to manufacturers of fur garments. It causes said furs, when sold, to be transported to purchasers thereof in the city of New York, State of New York, and into the various other States of tho United States than the State of New York. Respondents, Oldman Brothers, Inc., and Abrams & Linden, Inc., have been and are, and each of them has been and is engaged in the business of buying rabbit furs (cony) and of causing said furs to be dressed and dyed for them and each of them by respondent, A. Hollander & Son Inc., and of buying rabbit furs (cony) which have been dressed anJ dyed by said respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., from furriers dealing in such furs, and of manufacturing garments from said dressed and dyed rabbit furs (cony) and the sale of said garments to dealers for resale to the ultimate user purchasers, and of causing' said garments, when so sold, to be transported to the purchase;; thereof in the city of New York, State of New York, and in the various other States of the United States than the State of New York.

PAR. 3. Respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., in the course and condJict of its said business has been and is in competition with other individuals, partnerships, and corporations engaged in the business of dressing and dyeing furs. for the owners of said furs for A. HOLLANDER & SON, INC., ET AL. 25 :22 Complaint ·sale in interstate commerce or for sale to manufacturers to be made into garments for sale in such commerce.

Respondents, Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., and Fenrab Company, Inc., have been and are in the course and conduct 'Of their business in competition with other individuals, partnerships, and corporations offering for sale and selling furs in interstate .commerce.

Respondents, D. Geller & Son, Inc., Oldman Brothers, Inc., and Abrams & Linden, Inc., in the course and conduct of their business have been and are in competition with individuals, partnerships, and corporations engaged in the sale in interstate commerce of fur garments.

PAR. 4. Respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., uses and has used a process for dressing and dyeing muskrat fur and rabbit fur (cony) which causes said furs to resemble in appearance the fur o£ seal. Garments made from said dressed and dyer mu.skrat fur and said dressed and dyed rabbit fur (cony) resemble and simulate in appearance only, garments made irom dyed seal. Dressed and dyed muskrat fur and dressed and dyed rabbit fur (cony) are inferior to the fur of the seal in pliability and durability and in the wearing quality of the fur. Garments made from seal fur sell at prices greater than the sale prices of garments made from muskrat fur and rabbit fur (cony). . Respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., stamps or causes to be stamped on the back of each of the muskrat furs dressed and dyed. by it the word "Seal" in large and conspicuous letters. The words "Hollander" and "Seal" are stamped on said furs, at the top and bottom 'of the marking, respectively. Between these words appear the letters, "A. II. & S." Below the said word "Seal" in smaller and much less .conspicuous letters appear the words "Dyed 1\Iuskrat" and between them and the word "Seal" appears the lower border of the design in which the word "Seal" is featured as aforesaid. Respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., stamps or causes to be stamped on the back of each of the rabbit furs (cony) dressed and dyed by it the words "Nubian Seal" in large and conspicuous letters. Below the words "Nubian Seal" appear in letters so small and inconspicuous as to be noticeable only after close inspection the words "Dyed Cony".

PAR. 5. It has been and is the practice of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., after uressing, dyeing, and stamping muskrat fur and rabbit fur (cony) for the owners of said furs, including the other respondents herein, in pursuance of agreements with them, to furnish labels anu tags to be attached to garments made from such furs. The said labels and tags supplied by respondent, A. Hollander & 26 FEDERAL TRADE COl\!MISSION DECISIONS Complaint 21 F. T. C. Son, Inc., for use on rabbit fur (cony) dressed, dyed, and stamped by it bear the name of said respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc.,. accompanied by the words "Nubian Seal" in large and conspicuous letters and below the words "Nubian Seal" the words "Dyed Cony" in letters so relatively small as to be unnoticeable except on close inspection. The said labels supplied by respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., for use on muskrat fur dressed, dyed, and stamped by it bear in conspicuous type the words ''Hudson Seal". Below thesewords in type so small as to be unnoticeable, except on close inspection, appear the words "Dressed and Dyed By", and below said wordsappear in large type the words "A. Hollander & Son". Under the· words "A. Hollander & Son" appear in type unnoticeable, except on close inspection, the following: "Est. 1889 Dyed Muskrat". Thewords "Dyed Muskrat" are practically hidden from the view of or unnoticeable by an ultimate user of garments made from said fur • .Tags furnished by A. Hollander & Son, Inc., as aforesaid, to beattached to garments made from muskrat fur dressed, dyed, and stamped by it bear the same legend as stamped on the back of muskrat. furs.

PAn. 6. It has been and is the policy and practice of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., in order to encourage, promote, and extend the sale in commerce among and between the various States of the United States of muskrat and rabbit furs dressed, dyed, and stamped by it, and of garments made therefrom bearing the aforesaid labels and tags supplied by said respondent to owners of such furs or to manufacturers of garments therefrom, to engage in wide and extensive advertisements in magazines, newspapers, and other publications of geneul circulation in and through the various States of the United States.

In accordance with such policy and practice it has circulated and distributed among the trade in and through the various States of the United States, a. house organ entitled "Hollander". In such organ issued in June 1934 said respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., displays its aforesaid label and the words stamped on the muskrat fur it designates as aforesaid, but omits from such display the words "Dyed Muskrat". Across one of its pages appear the words "Endorsed From Coast to Coast" in large conspicuous black letters. It also contains the following:

Labels and tags (In large letters) are allotted on the basis or one each for every fifty skins. See that you get them with every shipment. Below these words appear the words "Hollander, A H & S, Seal" in the regular design said respondent uses on muskrat fur dressed, dyed and stamped by it.

A. HOLLANDER & SON, INC., ET AL. 27 :22 Complaint There also appears the following:

Reports from good stores throughout the country enthusiastically endorse the A. Hollander & Son plan for national advertising. Leading fur buyers ·everywhere are wiring in for labels and tags. "The most forward step ever taken ln behalf of the fur industry", they say. Are you taking steps to reap your full share of benefit from this campaign. If not, do so at once. Make up your mind right now that tags and labels are to go into everyone of your <!Oats. Make it a standing requirement on all your orders. Write us also for as many as you need to cover your present stock. Again, in such house organ respondent displays its label for "Nubian Seal". It represents in connection therewith as follows: The A. Hollander & Son national advertising will naturally increase the demand for all A. Hollander & Son products. Here are the two big "money furs" that vrl.ll now become more profitable for you than ever. Each is the best ln its class • • • concentrate on them • * • Feature them as ..A. Hollander & Son products". You will thus gain extra advantage from our advertising. Your sales will quicken. Your profit wlll increase. It has been and is the practice of responde~t also to furnish dealers in and through the various States of the United States with posters, pamphlets, counter and window display cards wherein are featured fur garments of various kinds bearing the labels of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc. One large piece of advertising literature in the form of a magazine it has circulated among the trade containing, among other things, in large and conspicuous letters, "A. Hollander & Son advertisements in national magazines will sell women from coast to coast." It also represents as follows: Throughout the length and breadth of the country the name of A. Hollander & Son will spread as meaning the best in Hudson Seal. It represents in such advertising literature that A. Hollander & Son Hudson Seal will be broadcast on the radio programs of lead- . ing magazines of general circulation in and through the United States.

In November 1934 appeared an advertisement of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., in a magazine of such character, in which the name of said respondent and the words "Hudson Seal" are printed in large, black outstanding letters. The words which it stamps on the back; of muskrat pelts, to wit, "Hollander A H & S Seal" appear in such advertisement in connection with the representation of a woman wearing a fur garment. At one place in such advertisement the words "Hudson Seal" are followed by ·a mark so small as to be almost indistinguishable, and in the lower part of the advertisement without any apparent relationship to the language in connection with which it appears, there are the words "Dyed :Musk- Complaint 21 F. T. C. rat" in the smallest letters appearing throughout the advertisement. The words are preceded by the same almost indistinguishable mark which appears after the words "Hudson Seal" in that part of the. advertising hereinbefore indicated. There is in such advertisement no other indication or suggestion that the garment featured is not. made from seal.

PAR. 7. It has been and is the practice of respondents, Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., and Fenrab Company, Inc., tocause and each of them now causes muskrat or rabbit furs, or both, to be dressed, dyed, marked and designated as described in paragraph 4 hereof by respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., in accordance with agreements for such services and at the instance or suggestion of said respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., or because of its practices described in paragraphs 4, 5· and 6 hereof, and thereupon to offe~ for sale and sell in commerce among and between the various Statesof the United States, such furs so dressed, dyed, stamped, and designated to manufacturers of fur garments or to other dealers in furs, together with the labels and stamps described in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6. It has been and is the practice of respondent, B. Geller & Son, Inc.,. to cause, and it still causes respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc. to dress, dye, stamp, and designate its muskrat furs as described i~ paragraph 4 hereof, in accordance with agreements for such services and at the instance or suggestion of said respondent, A. Hollander &. Son, Inc., or because of its practices described in paragraphs 4 5o and 6 hereof, and also to buy from furriers or other dealers mu~k­ rat furs so dressed, dyed, stamped, and designated by said resp~ndent A. Hollander & Son, Inc., and thereupon it has manufactured gar~ ments from such furs and has offered for sale and sold them in commerce among and between the various States of the United States with the labels and tags attached to each garment which have been. furnished it by said respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., as described in paragraph 5 hereof.

It has been and is the practice of respondent, Oldman Brothers Inc., and of respondent, Abrams & Linden, Inc., to offer for sale and sell in interstate commerce, garments made from rabbit skins which at the instance or request of respondent, A. Hollander & Son Inc.' or because of t h e practices. of sai'd respondent described in ' para-, graphs 4, 5, and 6, they have caused respondent, A. Hollander & Son Inc., tQ dress, dye, stamp, and designate as "Nubian Seal". It ha; also been its practice to attach to each and all of said garments the same labels and tags hereinbefore described for "Nubian Seal" which have been furnished them by respondent, A. Hollander & So~, Inc.,. as stated in paragraph 5 hereof.

A. HOLLAND:ER & SON, INC., ET AL. 29 22 Complaint PAR. 8. There have been for many years last past, and are individuals, partnerships and corporations offering for sale and selling in commerce among and between the various States of the United States, rabbit fur, muskrat fur and seal fur, and there have been and are individuals, partnerships and corporations offering for sale and selling in such commerce garments manufactured from rabbit fur, muskrat fur and seal fur, which have been and are truthfully described and designated.

PAR. 9. The word "seal", used in connection with furs, has signified and meant, and signifies and means to the purchasing or consuming public that the furs so designated have been and are the furs of the aquatic carnivorous mammal usually found in high latitudes known as seal or fur seal, and the word "seal'' used in connection with fur garments has signified and meant, and now signifies and means to the purchasing or consuming public, garments made from the furs of such seal. Use of such word "seal" by respondents as a noun, whether preceded by the word "Hudson", "Hollander", or "Nubian", to describe or designate the furs hereinbefore mentioned, namely seal dyed muskrat and seal dyed rabbit (cony), is false, misleading and deceptive to the trade and the public. The acts and practices of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., as described in paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 hereof, have suggested or instigated, aided, assisted, abetted and caused its corespondents herein to offer for sale and sell in interstate commerce muskrat furs and rabbit furs dressed, dyed, and stamped as described in the aforesaid paragraphs, in and among the various States of the United States as and for seal furs and garments made therefrom as and for garments made from seal furs, and such acts and practices of respondent, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., have been and are with the full knowledge, expectation, purpose, and intent that such furs or garments made therefrom would be offered for sale and sold in such in{-(!rstate commerce by its corespondents herein, and such acts and practices have been and are directly related to, and in furtherance of their business.

The acts and practices of respondents, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., B. Geller & Son, Inc., Fenrab Company, Inc., Oldman Brothers, Inc., and Abrams & Linden, Inc., have furnish manufacturers and dealers, wholesale and retail, with the means by which they have been and are able to perpetrate a fraud upon the purchasing public by representing that such furs so dressed, dyed, and stamped by respondent, A. Hollander & Son, have been or are seal furs, and that garments made from such furs have been and are made of seal furs, and by ex- 30 FEDERAL TRADE COl\IMISSION DECISIONS Order 21 F. T. C. hibiting to customers and prospective customers the aforesaid mark or designation stamped on such furs, or the labels and tags attached to such garments and supplied by respondent, A Hollander & Son, Inc., or by both acts, to support their false representations that such garments are made from seal fur; and such acts and practices of respondents have had and have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive the consuming public into the purchase of such furs as and for seal furs and into the purchase of garments made from such furs as and for garments made from seal furs. Such acts and practices of the aforesaid respondents have had and have, and each of them has had and has the .capacity and tendency to divert trade to them and to dealers offermg for sale or selling such furs, or garments made therefrom, to their customers in interstate commerce, to wit, the retail dealers, from dealers selling in such commerce muskrat furs, rabbit furs, seal furs and those of other furbearing animals truthfully marked and described, and from manufacturers and dealers selling, in such commerce, garments made from muskrat furs, rabbit furs, seal furs and those of other fur-bearing animals truthfully branded or described, and from their customers or vendees, the retail dealers.

PAn. 10. The above and foregoing practices of respondents have been and are, and the practice of each of them has been and is to the prejudice of the public and of the competitors of each and all of them, and have been and are unfair methods of competition in interstate commerce in violation of the provisions of Section 5 of an Act entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes", approved September 26, 1914.

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST 8 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, on the. 28th day of November 1934 i;sued its amended and supplemental complaint against A. Hollander & Son, Inc., Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., B. Geller & Son, Inc., Fenrab Company, Inc., Oldman Brothers Inc. and Abrams & Linden, Inc., respondents herein, and caused the sa:ne to be served upon said respondents as required by law, in which complaint it is alleged that respondents have been and are usinf)' unfair methods of competition in commerce in violation of the p;ovisions o£ Section 5 o£ said Act.

• Published as modified.

A. HOLLANDER & SON, INC., ET AL. 31 Order On January 25, 1935, respondents filed an answer to said complaint in which they consented that the Commission may make, enter and serve upon them an order' to cease and desist from the violations of law alleged in the complaint, in accordance with the provisions of Section (b) of Rule V of the Rules of Practice of the Commission; and the Commission having accepted said answer, issued an order to cease and desist on May 16, 1935, and thereafter, on to wit the 17th day of June 1935 the Commission, being now fully advised in the premises, modifies the said order to cease and desist, and It is now ordered, That respondents, A. Hollander & Son, Inc., Jacobson Brothers, Inc., Corn & Fenning, Inc., B. Geller & Son, Inc., Fenrab Company, Inc., Oldman Brothers, Inc., Abrams & Linden, Inc., their officers, agents, representatives, and employees, in connection with the dyeing or dressing, sale, offering for sale, or advertising of dyed muskrat fur or dyed cony (rabbit) fur, cease and desist from:

1. Describing furs in any. other way than by the use of the correct name of the fur as the last word of the description, and when any dye or blend is used simulating another fur the true name of the fur appearing as the last word of the description must be immediately preceded by the word "dyed", or ''blended", compounded with the name of the simulated fur.

2. Using the word "seal" alone or in connection, combination or conjunction with any other word or words to describe or designate dyed cony, unless and until the word "seal" is compounded with the word "dyed" and such compounded word is immediately followed by the word "cony", as "seal-dyed cony". 3. Using the word "seal" or the words "Hudson Seal" standing alone or in connection, combination or conjunction with any other word or words to describe or designate dyed muskrat unless and until the word "seal" or the words "Hudson Seal" are compounded with the word "dyed" and such word or words so compounded are immediately followed by the word or words signifying or designating the true name of the fur, as "seal-dyed muskrat" or "Hudson Seal-dyed muskrat".

4. Using the word "seal" or the words "Hudson Seal" standing alone or in connection, combination or conjunction with any other word or wonls (regardless of corporate name, trade name, or trade mark), <'xcept that the word "seal" may be used as an adjective to denote or describe the color or character of the dye of muskrat or cony fur, as "seal-dye<l muskrat" or "seal-dyed cony", nnd except that the words "IIuJson SC'al" may be used as an adjective to denote or 1136~3m--3S--vol.21----~ 32 FEDERAL TRADE COl\IMISSION DECISIONS Order 21 F.T.C.

describe the color or character of the dye of muskrat fur, as "Hudson Seal-dyed muskrat".

5. Using the word "Hudson" standing alone or in connection, combination or conjunction with any other word or words to describe or designate dyed cony (rabbit) fur.

It is further ordered, That the respondents shall, within 90 days from the date of the service upon them of the order herein, file with the Commission a report in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form of their compliance with this order. JOSEPH HOLLANDER, INC. 33 Syllabus