Gimbel Brothers, Inc.
Volume 61 · 61 F.T.C. 1051
deceptive advertisingpricing comparisons
Cite this decision
Gimbel Brothers, Inc., 61 F.T.C. 1051 (1962). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v061-0117
Report an error in this record (decision id v061-0117)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
In roe Matrer oF GIMBEL BROTHERS, INC.
ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket 7884. Complaint, Mar. 21, 1960—Decision, Oct. 17, 1962 Order requiring the corporate operator of 13 retail department stores in and around the cities of New York, N.Y., Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Pa., and Milwaukee, Wis., to cease. making in advertising deceptive pricing and savings claims for merchandise—including rugs, luggage, Hotpoint refrigerators, and cashmere coats—through use of such words as “comparable value”, “regularly”, “originally”, “list price’ with a fictitious price figure; and to cease overstating the size of rugs offered for sale. ComMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Gimbel Brothers, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has violated the provisions of said 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:
ParacraPH 1. Respondent Gimbel Brothers, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its principal office and place of business located at 38rd Street and Broadway in the city of New York, State of New York.
Par. 2. Respondent is now, and for some time last past has been, engaged in the advertising, offering for sale, sale and distribution of floorcoverings, luggage, household appliances, women’s wearing apparel and other articles of general merchandise to the public. GIMBEL BROS., INC. 1051 1027 Complaint It is further ordered, That the complaint, insofar as it relates to individual respondents Irving H. Stolz, Seth Harrison and Frank Silver, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
It is further ordered, That respondents 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 the order to cease and desist.