W & J Sloane

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

IN THE yIATTER OF W & J SLOANE ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE EDERc\L TRADE CO DIISSIO ACT Doclcet 7579. Complaint, Sept. 1959 Decision, Mar. 10, 1961 Order dismissing without prejudice-for the reason that the alleged unfair practices were committed by another company, since dissolved-complaint charging a New York City dealer with misrepresenting the price, composition, and size of its rugs.

Mr. Charles Donelan and 1111'. Charles S. Cox for the Commission. Goldstein, Judd Gurfein of Kew York, N. Y., for respondent. INITIAL DECISION BY I-IARRY R. HINKES, HEARING EXA::UNDER Respondent 'V & Sloane, a New York corporation, is charged in a complaint issued by the Federal Trade Commission on September , j959 with violations of the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act in connection ,,'ith the advertising, offering for sale sale and distribution of rugs. Pursuant to notice, hearings were helel in New York City.

Counsel for the complaint now moves that this proceeding be dismissed without prejudice to the right of the Commission to institute further proceedings in this matter. He points out that the proceeding is directed against "\V J Sloane, a corporation, incorporated ull(1er the laws of the State of New York; that no offcer or other indidcluals were joined as parties respondent; that the acts and practices alleged in the complaint flppal'enti:y occurred in December 1957 , and were committed by y &. J Sloa.ne, Inc. , a corporation existing and doing business under the 1.nys of the State of DE'1a;ware Hnd not by l'P-spondent herein; that TF &. . T Sloane, Inc. of Delaware ,,lS dissolved on February 2, j860; and that on or about September 436 FEDERAL 1'TRADE COM."'ISSION DECISIONS Complaint 58 F.l'.

, 1957, the name of respondent herein was changed to W & J Sloane Realty Corporation.

The record taken at the hearings he,ld in this proceeding con firms this recitation of corporate identities.

Under the circumstances, there does not appear to be any basis for a continuation of this proceeding against the nalnec1 corporate respondent. The dismissal of the complaint should, however, in the hearing exalliner s opinion, be without prejudice to the right of the Commission to take further action in the matter in the future should that course appear to be necessary. ORDER It i8 therefore ordered That the complaint be, and the same hereby , dismissed without prejudice to the right of the Commission to take any further action in the matter in the future which may warranted by the then existing circumstances. DECISIQX 01' THE CO:iDIISSIOX Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice the initial decision of the hea,ring examiner as t.o the above-named respondent shall on the 10th clay of J\Iarch, 19G1 , become the decision of the Commission.