Heller Brothers Packing Company, Inc.

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

I X THP JfA TTER OF HELLER BROTHERS PACKING COMPANY, IKC.

COXSEXT ORDER ETC., IX REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATTOX OF SEC. :2 (c J OF THE CLAYTOi-T ACT Docket 8011. Complaint, June 1960-Decision, May 1961 Consent order requiring a 'Vinter Garden, Fla. , paCkel" of citrus fruit to cease violating Sec. 2 (c) of the Clayton Act by paying brokerage, or its equivalent, to customers making purchases for their own accounts for resale. CO:)IVLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, hnying reason to believe that the party named in the. caption hereof, and hereinafter more particularly described, has been and is nmy viobting t.he provisions of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (U. Title 15, Section 13), hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges .jth respect thereto as follo,,' PARAGR.4.PH 1. Hespondel1t, 1-1el1e.l' Brothers Packing Company, Inc., hereinafter sometimes referred to as respondent or respondent 1-1e,ller, is a corporation, organized, existing and doing business l1Ider and by virt.ue of the laws of the State of Florida, with its offce. and principal place of business located at ",Vinter Garden Florida.

PAR. 2. Respondent is now and for the past seve.ral years lias been, engaged in tlle. business of packing, se,lling and distributing , ,, HELLER BROTHERS PACKING COMPANY, INC. 923 922 Complaint citrus frujt such as oranges, tangerines and grapefruit, all of ,.'which are hereinafter referred to as citrus fruit 01' fruit products. Respondent sells and c1istrilmtes its citrus fruit through brokers, as \Yell ns direct, to customers located in many sections of the United States. 'Vhere brokers are utilized in making sales for it, respondent pays them for their services a brokerage or commission, usually at the rate of 10 cents per 1% bushel box, or equivalent. Respondent' annual volume of business in the saJe and distribution of citrus fruit is substantial.

PAR. 3. In the COU1'se and conduct of its lmsinpss over the past several years, respondent has sold and distributed nnd is no" selling and distributing its citrns fruit in commerce, as "commerce " is defined in the aforesaid Clayton Act, as amended, to buyers located in the several states of the united States other than the Slate of Florida in "which respondent is located. Respondent transports or causes such citrus fruit hen sold, to be transported from its place of business or packing plant in the State of Florida or from other places within the State, to such lmyers or to the buyers' customers located in various other states of the lTnitecl Stat.es. In many instances respondent sells to brokers or buyers located in the State of Florida, but ships, or causes the citrus fruit to be shipped, to the buyers: customers located outside of said State. Thus there has been at a11 times mentioned herein a continuous course of trade in cormnerce in said citrus fruit across state lines behyeen said respondent and the respective buyers of Sllch fruit, or the buyers customers.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of its bllsiness as aforesaid respondent has been and is nmy making nmnor011S and substantial sales of citrus fruit to some, but not an, of its brokers and direct buyers purchasing for their myn account for resalp, and on a large number of these sales respondent. paid, granted(l or allowed, and is no", payillg,gralltillg or alhm"jng 1.0 these brokers and direct buyers on their own purchases, a commission, brokerage or other compensation, or an allmyance or discount in lieu thereof, in connection there\with.

PAIL 5. The acts and practices of respondent in paying, granting 01' alloy;ing a brokerage or commission, 01' an allowance or discount in lien thereof, to buyers on their 0\\-11 pnrchnses as hereinabove alleged and described, are in vl01ation of subsection (c) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended (FS.C. Title 15 , Section 18).

924 FEDERAL TRADE co:\nnSSION DECISIONS Dccision fig F. 1111'. Cecil G. lJIile.s clnd :.lh' . Ernest G. Barnes for the Commission. , and Johnson John.son Roth, Se,qaZ Roth of Orlando, F1a. of Tampa, Fla.) for respondent.

have\L DECISION BY ,VILLTA::r I.i. PACI\: : I-IE.-\RIKG EXAlIIIN.ER The complaint in this mat.ter charges the respondent "With violation of Section :2 (c) of the Clayton Act, as amended. An agreement for disposition of t.he proceeding by means of a. consent order has now been pxecutec1 by respondent and its counsel and counsel supporting the complaint and submitted to the hearing examiner for his consideration. A ttachec1 to and made fL part of the a.agreement is a stipulation entered into by the same pnl'ties for the purpose of making clear the intent. of the c.complaint and of the proposed order to cease and desist. The ,yard "agreement" as llsed hereinafter -will include the sti Plllation.

The agreement provides, among other t.things, that respondent admit.s all of the jurisdictional allegations in the complaint; that the record on \which the initial decision and the decision of the Commission shan be based shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement; that the inclusion of findings of fact and conclusions of hn, in the decision disposing of this matter is v, waived, together ,with any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission; that the order hereinafter set forth may be entered in disposition of the proceeding, such order to have the same force and effect as if entered a.after a full hearing, respondent . specificany waiving any a.nd all rights to challenge or contest t.he va.lidity of such order; that the order may be altered. modified or set aside in the mfll1Wl' prodded for other orders of the Commission; that the complaint may be u8e(1 in construing the terms of the order; and that the agreemeat is for settle:',wnt purposes only and does not eonstitutc an admission by respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

The hearing examiner ha'Ting ron5i(le1'e(1 the agreement and proposed order, and being of the opinion that they provide an adequate basis for appropriate disposition of the proceeding, t.he agreement is hereby accepted, the follmying jurisdictional findings made, an(l the follo"\ing order issued:

1. Respondent 1-1e11pr Brothers Packing Company, Inc. , is a Florida corporation ,with its offce and principal place of business located jn ,'linter Garden, Florida.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the rrspondent. KILLARNEY FRL'I'l' COMPANY 925 922 Complaint ORDER It i8 ordend That the respondent Heller Brothers Packing Company, Inc., a corporation tnd its offcers, agents, represent.atives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the sale of citrus fruit or fruit products in commerce lS "commerce ' is clefinell in t.he aforesaid Clayton Act, do forthwith.h cease and desist from:

Paying, granting 01' allo"\ing directly 01' indirectly, to any buyer or to anyone acting for or in behalf of, or who is subject to the direct or indirect control of such buyer, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof, upon or in connection with any sale of citrus fruit or fruit products to such buyer for his own account. DECISION OF THE COJDUSSWX AND ORDEB TO File HEPOHT OF COJ.fPLIANCE The Commission having now deiermined that the hearing examiner s initial decision, filed J annary 18 1961 is adequate and appropri"t.e to dispose of this proceeding: I t is ordered That said decision be, and it hereby is, adopted as the decision of the Commission.

It is f"rther o",lend That the respondent 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 ma.nner and form in which it has complied with the order to cease and desist contained in the aforesaid initial decision.