Legal Document

359 U.S. 385 79 Supreme Court Reporter 818 3 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 893 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Petitioner,v.MANDEL BROTHERS, INC. Number 234. Argued March 23, 1959. Decided May 4, Mr. Daniel M. Friedman Washington, D.C., for the petitioner. Samuel or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Horne, respondent. Justice DOUGLAS delivered opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner issued a complaint charging respondent, retail department store, with violations Fur Products Labeling Act, 65 Statutes-at-Large 175, 15 Code KF62 § 69, Annotated KF65 U5 69. Violations were found and cease-and-desist order was issued. One principal that many respondent's sales falsely 'invoiced' in violation Act.1 The term 'invoice' is defined 2(f) as 'a written account, memorandum, list, catalog, which connection any commercial dealing fur products furs, describes particulars transported to purchaser, consignee, factor, bailee, correspondent, agent, other person who engaged commercially furs.' Section 5(b) provides product if it not show (a) name animal produced fur; and, where applicable, product(b) contains used fur, (c) bleached, dyed, otherwise artificially colored (d) composed whole substantial part paws, tails, bellies, waste (e) address issuing 'invoice'; (f) country origin imported furs. 2 Commission respondent had violated provisions Act by failure include its slips products, address, (b) whether colored, correct producing fur. 4 also provides2 misbranded (1) 'falsely deceptively labeled * identified,' (2) there affixed label setting forth substantially same six items information required an 'invoice,' (3) designates some than prescribed Name Guide.3 labels on als e numerous instances reason three categories listed under second 4. It held, however, no evidence deficient information. Nevertheless, against misbranding information, all listed. On appeal, Appeals first eliminated prohibitions relating invoicing ground slip within meaning Act; second, struck from prohibition through omission found. 254 Federal Reporter, 2nd 18. case here petition writ certiorari. 358 812, 54, 55. I. 5 First, invoicing. We start whose avowed purpose, inter alia, protect 'consumers deception resulting misbranding, false deceptive advertising, S.Rep. 78, 82d Cong., 1st Sess., Page 1. House Report emphasizes bill 'designed consumers others widespread abuses arising out misleading matter advertisements otherwise. H.R.Rep. 546, Title (which, though limiting plain text, nonetheless useful aid resolving ambiguity (see Maguire versus Commissioner, 313 1, 9, 61 789, 794, 85 L.Ed. 1149), states purpose 'protect 175. So we have purchasers improper 'invoicing.' therefore should read definition hospitably end view. unambiguous. Yet do problem penal statute deserves strict construction. deal remedial legislation regulatory nature our task fit, possible, parts into harmonious whole. Black Magnolia Liquor Co., 355 24, 26, 78 106, 108, 5. 6 uses wri tten account' 'memorandum.' far included. requires be 'in dealing' A sale plainly 'commercial dealing.' invoice 'purchaser.' There again customer retailer inclusion would seem complete. What turned way last phrase 2(f)—'or held 'engaged commercially' modifies only 'any person' but preceding terms subsection including Cf. Standard Brewery, 251 210, 218, 40 139, 140, 64 229. That possible conclude, this clause applied antecedent.4 think partial mutilation construe so inapplicable sales. In place, language specifies sweeping persons benefit requirements imposed, viz., agent. Then general catch-all furs' added. construing can full protection accorded consumers. agree point stressed consumer's solely invoices are at each antecedent step delivery transfer either furs products. advertising mislabeling 3(b) Act5 applicable contained clause. If Congress, spite desire consumers, withheld them benefits reliable invoices, clauses distributively, making refashioning 3, undertaking more consonant congressional committee judicial construction 7 Moreover, 'labels,' advised, pieces cloth sewn garments tags purchaser likely throw away after purchase. permanent record transaction has. Its importance emphasized Commission: 8 'Inasmuch may serve documentary link connecting specific back retailer's records therefor, application transactions between retailers represents key implement effective administration Act.' 9 has been consistent administrative Act.6 This contemporaneous entitled great weight (United American Trucking Ass'ns, 310 534, 549, 60 1059, 1067, 84 1345; supra; Housing Administration Darlington, Inc., 84, 90, 141, 145, 132) even cases settled consent rather litigation. 10 Finally urges local subject exercise Congress commerce power. Misbranding drug shipment interstate power Sullivan, 332 689, 68 331, 92 297. decision predecessors sanction what done here. 11 conclude accordingly judgment aside give proper reversed. II 12 Second, labeling. Commission, noted, committed disclosure 4(2) Act,7 noting complied 4(2). however directed 'misbranding by: Failing affix showing' respect violation. 13 believe abused 'wide discretion' choice remedy 'deemed adequate cope unlawful practices' disclosed record. Jacob Siegel company Trade Comm., 327 608, 611, 66 758, 760, 90 888. limited prohibiting 'the illegal practice precise form' existing past. Comm. Ruberoid 343 470, 473, 72 800, 803, 96 1081. agency, like others, fashion relief restrain 'other related acts.' National Labor Relations Board Express Pub. 312 426, 436, 693, 700, 930. outlawed 'misbranding.' properly branded garment specified. These closely interrelated might well example failed disclose bleached dyed default when came fact garment. cannot generalize scope these orders. depends facts extent particular violator fenced in. Here, Sherman et seq., decrees (Local 167, etc. States, 291 293, 299, 54 396, 399, 804; International Salt 392, 400—401, 17—18, 20; Boxing Club New York, Incorporated 242, 253, 245, 251, 270), question activity enjoined one kind degree. sit determine trier exercised allowable discretion. Where episodes extensive number they here,8 permissible acts prophylactic preventive measure. 14 Respondent objects wording saying suggests store sold contrary bows suggestion Part A, par. rephrased enjoin failing showing element order. phase reversed, indicated. 16 ordered. 17 Reversed direction. part: '(a) introduction, manufacture commerce, sale, offering transportation distribution advertised invoiced, rules regulations section 8(b), shall unfair method competition, act practice, Act. '(b) distribution, made shipped received provides: 'For purposes considered misbranded— '(1) identified, form misrepresentation deception, directly implication, such product; '(2) words figures legible— '(A) names (as set Guide) animals qualifying statement pursuant 7(c) '(B) fact; '(C) '(D) '(E) name, identification registered introduction introduce sell advertise offer transport distribute commerce; '(F) '(3) paragraph (2)(A) sets provided paragraph.' register hair, fleece, fur-bearing maintain. ex rel. Santarelli Hughes, Cir., 116 613, 616; Puget Sound Electric R. Benson, 253 KF105 F3 710, 711; Sutherland, Statutory Construction (3d ed. 1943), 4921. Note supra. See Ed Hamilton Furs, 51 F.T.C. 186. advised since case, decided 1954, 137 complaints carg ing involving presently outstanding 110 orders furriers agreed discontinue note 2, 58 ddi tion 187 provide additional labeling standards. CFR, Pt. 301.

Classification Label: 7