A. Weiss & Bob Alderman Fur Corp.

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

IN THE ~IATTER OF A. \VEISS & BOB ALDERl\lan FUR CORP. ET AL. CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IX REGARD TO THE ALLEGED 'VIOLATION OF THE FEDER..'\L TRADE COl\HnSSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 837~, Com.1Jla-i?lt, Apr. 21, 1961-Deci.8-ion, Sept. 22, 1961 Consent order requiring New York City furriers to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by labeling and invoicing fur products falsely to show that artificially colored fur Call tained therein was natural, and by failing comply in other respects ,with 1a beling and invoicing requirements. CO:i\IPLAIKT 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 A. \Veiss & Bob Alderman Fur Corp., a corporation and Abrnhal11 ,Veiss and Hobert Alderman, individually and as oflicers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Ads nnd the Rules and Regulations promulgated under' the Fur Products Labeling ..c~tct, and it appearing to the. Commission that a pl'oceecljng by it in respect thereof 'would be in the public. interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respl' ct as 10110'1\"8:

\JUGli.:ll)JJ 1. A. \Veiss 8: Bob Alc1ermnn Fur Corp., is a corporatiOB Organized: existing and doing business under find by virtue of the b 'ys of the Stn Ie of ~ e'y York with its office find principal place of business located at 208 'Vest 30th Street, New York, New York. ALl'nhnl1l 'Yeiss and Hobert. Alderman are officers of the said corporcHe l'l'spondent and control, direct and formulate the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. Their office and princ.ipnl plc1ce of business is the same as that of the said corporate responden t.

PAIL 2. Subsequent to the effective. cbte of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 1052 , respondents have. been and are now engaged in the. introduction into commerce, and in the manufacture. for introduction into commerce, nnd in the sale, ndve-rtising, and oflering for snJe, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in commerce, of fur products; and hate manufactured for sale, solel 1\.clvertised, otl'el'ed for sale, trnnsported and distri buted rur 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 produc.t" are deiined in the Fur Products Labeling Act. Decision 59 F.

PAR. 3. Certain of said fur nroducts were misbranded or otherwise falsely or deceptirely labeled in that sa.id fur products were labeled to show that the. fur contained therein was natural when in fact such fur was bleached, dyed or otherwise nTtificial1y colored in violation of Section 4 (1) or the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were l11isbrnnded in that they were not labe.led as required under the provisions of Sectio1l4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner nnd fornl prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely find deceptively invoiced in that the.y were not invoiced as requil'ec1lmc1er the provisions of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner a.nd form pl'eseribec1 by the Rules nnd Regulations promulgated thereunder.

PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in that said fur products were invoiced to show that the fur contained.d therein wns natnrnl when in fact such fur was bleached, dyed or otherwise artifically colored in violation of Section fj (b) (2) or the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAH. 7. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgn,ted the-reunder and constitute unfair and deceptive nets and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

11b' , Robe1,t lV. Lo-wthian supporting the complaint. Respondents for themselves.

INITIAL DECISION BY LEON R. GROSS, 1-IEAnING EXAl\IlNEH On April 21 , 1961, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the. Fur Products Labeling A. , the. Federal Trn.de Commission issued its complaint against. the. above-named respondents, charging them with violating the aforesaid Acts nnd the Rules and Hegulations issued pursuant to the Fur Products Labeling Act by, inter aha, misbranding and falsely and deceptively invoicing fur products sold by respondents in commerce~ as "cornmeTce ~~ is defined in the aforementioned Acts. .A.. copy of the complaint "~ (lS served upon respondents as required by la"\y. Thereafter, respondents entered into an ngrcement. dnted t.Tl1Jy 3L 19G1, which wns presented to this Hearing Examiner on August S 196L The agreement purports to dispose. of an of the issues in this proceeding as to a11 the respondents, and has been signed by all the respondents nnd counsel supporting the complaint, and approved the Chief, Division of Enforcement; the Assistant Director; and the ..

A. 'VEISS & BOB ALDERMAN FUR CORP. ET AL. 591 589 Decision Director, of the Bureau of Textiles and Furs of the Federal Trade Commission.

Said agreement contains a proposed consent cease and desist order which purports to dispose of this proceeding without the need for formal hearings. The agreement conforms to the requirements of ~ 3.21 and ~ 3.25 of the Federal Trade Commission s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings, and contains: A. An admission by respondents of an jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint;

B. Provisions that:

(1) The complaint may be used in construing the terms of the orde-r; (2) The order shall have the same force and effect as if entered a-after a fun hearing;

(3) The agreeme.nt shah not become a part of the officinJ record of the proceeding unless nnel until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission;

(4) The entire record on which the initial decision and the decision of the Commission may be based shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement;

(5) The order may be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided for other orders;

C. "'\Vaivers of:

(1) The making of findings of fact or conclusions of la,y; (2) Further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission;

(3) Any right to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered in accordnl1ce with the agreement;

D. A statement that the signing of said n.gree.ment is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint. I-Iaving considered the complaint and the agreement, including the proposed order, and being of the opinion that it provides an appropriate basis for disposition of this proceeding in all respects, the hearing examiner hereby accepts the agreement, which shah not become a part of the official record unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission; makes the following jurisdictional findings; and issues the following order:

1. Respondent A. "\Veiss &; Bob Aldermnn Fur Corp. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la;\ys or the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business Jocnted at 208 "'\Vest 30th Street, N e\, York, New York. Incli,-jdual respondents Abn..hnm"'\V e.iss and Robert Alderman n re ofi1cers of sa id corporation, They formulate, direct a.nd control the. prnctiees of the 592 FEDERAL TRADE COl\fMISSION DECISIONS Order 59 F.

corporate respondent. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding nnd of the respondents herein above named.

3. The complaint states a c.cause of action against said respondents under the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act.

4. This proceeding is in the interest of the public. ORDER It J'de1'ed That respondent A. "\Veiss & Bob Alderman Fur Corp. n, corporation, and its oflicers, and Abraham "\Veiss and Robert Alderman, 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 or manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the sa.le, advertising or oflering for sale in commerce, or the 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 have been mncle in ",hole or in part of fur ,which has been shipped and received in commerce as "commerce fur" and "fur products" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease nnd desist from:

1. :Misbranding fur products by A. Representing directly or by implication on labels that furs fur products are natural, when such is not the fact; B, Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in "ords and ligures plainly legible alj the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of S 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act; 2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Repre.senting directly or by implication on inyoic.es that furs or fur products are natural, when such is not the fact; B. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products invoices sho',,ing an the. information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of S 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products La be-ling Act. DECISION OF THE COJBIISSlOX .\XD onder: TO FILE RI~pont OF COJIPLL\::\'CE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice, the initial c1eeision of the hearin~ examiner shall on the 22nd dav of September 1961, become. the t1e('i~joll of the Commission; and r.ccorc1ingly:

It is onle7' Th:1t the nbOH!-named l't::'sponc1cnts slwll ,'-within sixty (GO) days after ser"ice upon them oJ this 01'1101', file ,yjth the Commjs- , . . .

LIVIGEN LABORATORY SALES CORP. ET AL. 593 593 Complaint sion a report in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist.