Colt Fashions, Inc.

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

In Tur Marrer or COLT FASHIONS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-195. Complaint, July 24, 1962—Decision, July 24, 1962 Consent order requiring manufacturing furriers in New York City to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to show on labels and invoices the true animal name of furs and when fur was artificially colored, failing to use the term “natural” where required and to comply with other requirements of the Act, and furnishing false guaranties with respect to certain fur products.

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 its by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Colt Fashions, Inc., a New York corporation, and Isadore Greenberg and Myron Greenberg, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have 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:

Complaint 61 F.C.

ParacrapH 1. Respondent Colt Fashions, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondents Isadore Greenberg and Myron Greenberg are officers of the said corporate respondent and control, direct and formulate the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. Respondents are manufacturers of fur products, including fur trimmed coats and jackets, and have their office and principal place of business at 260 West 39th Street, New York, N.Y. Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce and in the manufacture for 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 have manufactured for sale, 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 misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products with labels which failed :

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To show that the fur product contained or was composed of bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such was the fact.

Par. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects :

(a) The term “natural” was not used to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(g) of said Rules and Regulations. (b) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set out in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of said Rules and Regulations.

(c) Required item numbers were not set forth, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations.

COLT FASHIONS, INC., ET AL. - 291 289 Decision and Order Par. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were invoices pertaining to such fur products which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

Par. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) The term “natural” was not used to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(g) of said Rules and Regulations. (b) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. Par. 7. Respondents furnished false guaranties under Section 10(b) of the Fur Products Labeling Act with respect to certain of their fur products by falsely representing in writing that they had a continuing guaranty on file with the Federal Trade Commission when said respondents in furnishing such guaranties had reason to believe that the fur products so falsely guaranteed would be sold, transported and distributed in commerce, in violation of Rule 48(c) of the Rules and Section 10(b) of said Act.

Par. 8. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, a 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 and unfair methods of competition in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act. DeEcISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having there- Decision and Order 61 F.T.C.

after executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission’s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent, Colt, Fashions, 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 260 West 89th Street, in the city of New York, State of New York.

Respondents Isadore Greenberg and Myron Greenberg are officers of said corporation, and their address is the same as that of said corporation.

2. 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 is ordered, That respondents Colt Fashions, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Isadore Greenberg and Myron Greenberg, 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 sale, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the manufacture for sale, sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation, or distribution of any fur product which is 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. Misbranding fur products by:

A. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

CUSTOM BUILDERS 293 289 Sylabus B. Failing to disclose that fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially ‘colored are natural.

C. Failing to set forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the sequence required by Rule 80 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. D. Failing to set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. B. Failing to disclose that fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored are natural.

C. Failing to set forth the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

3. Furnishing false guaranties that fur products are not misbranded, falsely advertised or falsely invoiced under the provisions of the Fur Products Labeling Act, when there is reason to believe that the fur products falsely guaranteed may be introduced, sold, transported or distributed in commerce. lt is further 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 in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order.