The Montamower Company

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

IN THE Marrer OF THE MONTAMOWER COMPANY ET AL.

ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT | Docket 6667. Complaint, Oct. 29, 1956—Decision, Mar. 7, 1957 Consent order requiring the manufacturer in Traverse City, Mich., of a grasscutting device designated “‘MontaMower” to cease representing that lawn mowers which were used or reconditioned or which contained secondhand parts were new or unused, and to cease advertising or selling used lawn mowers without disclosing the fact by a clear and conspicuous statement. A consent order disposing of the issues as to the distributor respondent was entered February 14, 1957, supra, page 697. Mr. Donald R. Moore for the Commission.

The MontaMower Co., Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague appearing without counsel. . InrrraL Decision By Joseph Callaway, Heartne ExsMIner As to respondents The MontaMower Company, a corporation; Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Montague, and. Velma Montague, individually and as officers of said corporation The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint. against, the above-named respondents on October 29, 1956 charging them with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. as alleged in the complaint. After. being served .with the complaint, respondent Herbert B. Montague entered into an agreement, with counsel sup: porting the complaint, containing a consent order to cease and desist which was the basis of an initial decision by the hearing examiner, filed January 2, 1957. That initial decision left the issues pending as to respondents: The MontaMower Company, a corporation, Hubert ,H.- Montague, ‘Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague, individually and as officers of said corporation. -On January 18, 1957, respondents, The MontaMower Company, a corporation, Hubert H.- Montague, Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague, individually: and as officers of said corporation entered into an agreement with counsel supporting the complaint for a consent order to cease and desist from the practices complained of, which agreement purports to dispose of all the issues in this proceeding as to their remaining respondents without hearing. The agreement has been duly approved by the Acting Director of the THE MONTAMOWER CO. ET AL. 765 764 Decision Bureau of Litigation and has been submitted to the undersigned, heretofore designated to act as hearing examiner herein, for his consideration in accordance with Section 3.25 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice.

In said last mentioned agreement, respondents, The MontaMower Company, a corporation, Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague, individually and as officers of said corporate respondent, have admitted all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and have agreed that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been made in accordance with such allegations. The agreement further provides that said respondents waive all further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission including the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law and the right to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with the agreement. It has also been agreed by said respondents and counsel supporting the complaint that the record shall consist solely of the complaint and said agreement, that the agreement shall not become a part of the official “record unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission, that said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by said: respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint, that said order to cease and desist shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and may be altered, modified: or set aside in the manner provided for other orders of the Commission, and that the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order.

This proceeding having now come on for final consideration on the complaint and the aforesaid agreement containing the consent order, it appears that the agreement and order cover all the allegatibns of. the complaint as‘to said respondents and provide for an appropriate disposition of the proceeding as to all parties except Herbert B. Montague, an individual trading as MontaMower Distributing Company. The proceedings as to him was disposed of in the former initial decision. The order and the agreement are therefore accepted and ordered filed upon becoming a part of the Commission’s decision, pursuant to Section 3.21 and 3.25 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and the hearing examiner accordingly makes the following findings for jurisdictional purposes, and order. 1. Respondent, The MontaMower Company is a corporation organized, existing and doing business by virtue of the laws of the State of Michigan. It has its office and principal place .of business Decision 53 E.T.C.

in the MontaMower Building, Traverse City, Michigan. Respondents Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague are officers of said corporation and formulate, direct and control its policies. They have their office and principal place of business at the same address as the corporate respondent. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents named in the last preceding paragraph. The complaint states a cause of action against said respondents under the Federal Trade Commission Act. This proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER . It is ordered, That respondent The MontaMower Company, a corporation, and its officers; respondents Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Montague and Velma Montague, individually and as officers of respondent The MontaMower Company; and respondents’ agents, employees or representatives, directly or through any corporate or other device, in or in connection with the offering for sale, sale or distribution in commerce (as commerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act) of lawn mowers now designated as Monta- Mower or any other lawn mower or grass-cutting device, by the same or any other name, do forthwith cease and desist from: 1. Representing, directly or by implication, that used or reconditioned lawn mowers, or mowers made in whole or in part of used, second-hand or reconditioned parts of materials, are new or unused, or are made of new or unused parts or materials. 2. Advertising, offering for sale or selling any lawn mowers which have been used, or which contain parts or materials which have been used, without disclosing to the purchaser or potential purchaser, by a clear and conspicuous statement in advertising and sales promotion matter and on the product and the container in which it is shipped and delivered, that the product is used or not new, or that it contains parts or materials which have been used or which are not new.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 7th day of March, 1957, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly :

It is ordered, That respondent The MontaMower Company, a corporation, and respondents Hubert H. Montague, Gerald T. Mon- THE MONTAMOWER CO. ET AL. 767 764 Decision tague and Velma Montague, individually and as officers of respondent The MontaMower Company, 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 the order to cease and desist. 511071—60 —- 50 768 FEDERAL ‘TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Decision 53 B.T.C.