Goldstein-Migel Co.

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

days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with the order to cease and desist.

IN THE MATTER OF

GOLDSTEIN-MIGEL CO.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS

Docket 8262. Complaint, Dec. 30, 1960—Decision, May 2, 1961

Consent order requiring a Waco, Tex., furrier to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by advertising in newspapers which failed to disclose the names of animals producing certain furs or that some fur products contained artificially colored fur, and represented prices as reduced from regular prices which were in fact fictitious, and as lower than wholesale prices of a month previous when such was not the fact;

and by failing to keep adequate records as a basis for pricing and value claims.

Complaint 58 F.T.C.

COMPLAINT

Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Goldstein-Migel Co., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Goldstein-Migel Co., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Texas, with its office and principal place of business located at 521 Austin Street, Waco. Texas. PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondent has been and is now engaged in the introduction into commerce and in the sale, advertising and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in commerce, of fur products; and has sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which had been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce", "fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that respondent caused the dissemination in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said Act, of certain newspaper advertisements, concerning said products, which were not in accordance with the provisions of Section 5(a) of the said Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder; and which advertisements were intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of said fur products. PAR. 4. Among and included in the advertisements as aforesaid, but not limited thereto, were advertisements of respondent which appeared in issues of the Waco Tribune Herald, a newspaper published in the City of Waco, State of Texas, and having a wide circulation in said State and various other States of the United States. By means of said advertisements and others of similar import and meaning, not specifically referred to herein, respondent falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in that said advertisements: (a) Failed to disclose the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in the fur product as set forth in

GOLDSTEIN-MIGEL CO. 663 661 Decision the Fur Products Name Guide, in violation of Section 5(a)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. (b) Failed to disclose that fur products contained or were composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such was the fact, in violation of Section 5(a)(3) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. (c) Represented prices of fur products as having been reduced from regular or usual prices where the so-called regular or usual prices were in fact fictitious in that they were not the prices at which said merchandise was usually sold by respondent in the recent regular course of business, in violation of Section 5(a)(5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rule 44(a) of said Rules and Regulations. (d) Represented, through such statements as "These furs are marked for sale to you below the price we would have had to pay for them wholesale one month ago", that prices of fur products were lower than the wholesale price of one month previous, when such was not the fact, in violation of Section 5(a)(5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rule 44(a) of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 5. In advertising fur products for sale as aforesaid respondent made claims and representations respecting the prices and values of fur products. Respondent, in making such claims and representations, failed to maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations were based, in violation of Rule 44(e) of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 6. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Mr. Harry E. Middleton, Jr., supporting the complaint.

Mr. Herbert Scharff, of Waco, Tex., for respondent.

INITIAL DECISION BY EDWARD CREEL, HEARING EXAMINER

The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against the above-named respondent on December 30, 1960, charging it with having violated the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the rules and regulations issued thereunder, and the Federal Trade Commission Act by falsely and deceptively advertising certain fur products. On March 10, 1961, there was submitted to the hearing examiner an agreement between respondent and counsel supporting the complaint providing for the entry of a consent order.

Order 58 F.T.C.

Under the terms of this agreement, the respondent admits the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint. The parties agree, among other things, that the cease and desist order there set forth may be entered without further notice and have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and the document includes a waiver by the respondent of all rights to challenge or contest the validity of the order issuing in accordance therewith. The agreement further recites that it is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

The hearing examiner finds that the content of the agreement meets all the requirements of Section 3.25(b) of the Rules of the Commission.

The hearing examiner having considered the agreement and proposed order, and being of the opinion that they provide an appropriate basis for settlement and disposition of this proceeding, the agreement is hereby accepted, and it is ordered that said agreement shall not become a part of the official record unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission. The following jurisdictional findings are made and the following order issued: 1. Respondent Goldstein-Migel Co. is a Texas corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 521 Austin Street, in the City of Waco, State of Texas. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER

It is ordered, That Goldstein-Migel Co., a corporation, and its officers, and respondent's representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce of fur products, or in connection with the 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 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:

TUSECK ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC. 665 661 Syllabus A. Fails to disclose:

1. The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations. 2. That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact. B. Represents directly or by implication that the regular or usual price of any fur product is any amount which is in excess of the price at which respondent has usually and customarily sold products in the recent regular course of business. C. Represents directly or by implication that prices are reduced from previous wholesale prices when such is not the fact. D. Misrepresents in any manner the savings available to purchasers of respondent's fur products. 2. Making price claims and representations respecting prices and values of fur products unless there are maintained by respondent full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based.

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 2nd day of May, 1961, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly: It is ordered, That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with the order to cease and desist