Irving Lebo & Son, Inc.

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

In Tee MatrTer oF IRVING LEBO & SON, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7425. Complaint, Feb. 26, 1959—Decision, Aug. 28, 1959 Consent order requiring New York City furriers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to furnish to purchasers invoices showing required information; by representing, on invoices and in advertisements, prices of fur products as reduced from regular prices which were in fact fictitious; and by failing to keep adequate records as a basis for such pricing claims.

Mfr. John T. Walker for the Commission.

Mr. Fred L. Weisler of New York, N.Y., for respondents. Initraz Decision By Joun B. Pornpexter, Heartne Examiner On February 26, 1959 the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint charging Irving Lebo & Son, Inc., a corporation, and Irving Lebo, Stanley Lebo, and Harvey Lebo, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, with falsely and deceptively invoicing and advertising certain of their fur products in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. and the Fur Products Labeling Act.

After issuance and service of the complaint, the respondents and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement for a consent order. The agreement has been approved by the Director and the Assistant Director of the Bureau of Litigation. The agrecment disposes of the matters complained about. The pertinent provisions of said agreement are as follows: Respondents admit aJl jurisdictional facts; the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order; the order shall have the same force and effect. as if entered after a full hearing and the said agreement. shall not become a part of the official record of the proceeding unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission; the record herein shall consist. solely of the complaint and the agreement; respondents waive the requirement. that the decision must contain a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law; respondents waive further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, and the order may be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided by statute for other orders; respondents waive any right to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered in accordance with the agreement and the signing IRVING LEBO & SON, INC., ET AL. 183 182 Order of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

The undersigned hearing examiner having considered the agreement and proposed order and being of the opinion that the acceptance thereof will be in the public interest, hereby accepts such agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and issues the following order:

JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS 1. Respondent Irving Lebo & Son, 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. 9. The individual respondents, Irving Lebo, Stanley Lebo and Harvey Lebo, are president, vice president, and secretary and treasurer, respectively, of said corporate respondent. Their addresses are the same as that of the corporate respondent. 8. 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 7s ordered, That Irving Lebo & Son, Inc., a corporation, and Irving Lebo, Stanley Lebo, and Harvey Lebo, individually and as officers of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, and manufacture for introduction, into commerce, or the sale, advertising. offering for sale, transportation or distribution, in commerce, of fur products, or in connection with the sale, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation, or distribution of fur products which are made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as “commerce,” “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products an invoice showing all of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

B. Representing, directly or by implication, on ivoices, that the regular or usual price of any fur product is any amount which is Sylabus 56 F.T.C.

in excess of the price at which respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of business. 2. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement, or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of fur products, and which: A. Represents, directly or by implication, in advertisements, that the regular or usual price of any fur product is anv amount which is in excess of the price at which respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of business.

3. Making price claims and representations of the type referred to in Paragraph 2A above, unless respondents maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims or representations are based.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCTK Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall on the 28th dav of August, 1959, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly ;

It ts ordered, That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth im detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist.