I want to know about...

O N A L
A

EDF

j uttera
JI SCRIPTA
I M ANET 1

< 7,
Ab
REGISTER
NUMBER 194

VOLUME 20

Washington, Wednesday, October 5, 1955

TITLE 16 COMMERCIAL
PRACTICES
Chapter I Federal Trade Commission Docket 6256
P art 13 D igest of C ease and D esist
O rders GADGET-OF-THE-MONTH CLUB, INC., ET AL.

Subpart Advertising falsely or mis leadingly: 13.155 Prices: Comparative;
Savings and Discounts Subsidized;
13.200 Sample, offer or order conform
ance: 13.275 Undertakings, in general.
Subpart Offering unfair, improper and deceptive inducements to purchase or deal: 13.2060 Sample, offer or order conformance; 13.2070 Special or trial offers, savings, and discounts; 13.2090
Undertakings, in general. In connection with the offering for sale, sale, and dis tribution in commerce, of miscellaneous articles of merchandise: 1 Represent ing, directly or by implication, that sub scribers to the Gadget-of-the-Month Club, or other purchasers of respondents merchandise, will receive any specified number of articles of merchandise with in any stated period of time, unless the number of articles specified are actually delivered within the stated period of time; and 2 representing that the total retail price of the articles of merchandise delivered to subscribers is greater than the subscription price or misrepresenting in any manner the retail price of re spondents merchandise; prohibited.
Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U. S. C. 46. Interpret or apply sec. 5, 38 Stat. 719, as amended; 15
XI. S. O. 45 Cease and desist order, Gadgetof-the-Month Club, Inc., et al., Los Angeles, Calif., Docket 6256, September 8, 1955

In the M atter of G adget-of-the-M onth Club, Inc., a Corporation, and Don L.
Davis, and Mary Lou M offitt Davis, Individually and as Officers of Said Corporation This proceeding was heard by Abner E. Lipscomb, hearing examiner, upon the complaint of the Commission which charged respondents with unfair and de ceptive acts and practices in connection with the retail sale of miscellaneous articles of merchandise referred to as gadgets , in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and upon an Agreement for Consent Order which dis
posed of all the issues involved in the proceeding and which was submitted to the hearing examiner pursuant to agree ment entered into by respondents with counsel supporting the complaint, sub sequent to the filing with the Commission o f their answer thereto.
By the terms of said agreement, re spondents admitted all the jurisdictional allegations set forth in the complaint, and agreed that the record in the matter might be taken as if the Commission had made findings of jurisdictional facts in accordance therewith, and all parties agreed that the answer theretofore filed by respondents be withdrawn; expressly waived a hearing before a hearing ex aminer or the Commission; the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law by the hearing examiner or the Com mission; the filing of exceptions and oral argument before the Commission, and all further and other procedure before the hearing examiner and the Commission to which respondents might be entitled under the Federal Trade Commission Act or the rules o f practice of the Commission.
Respondents agreed that the order contained in the agreement should have the same force and effect as if made after a full hearing, presentation of evidence, and findings and conclusions thereon, specifically waiving any and all right, power, or privilege to challenge or con test the validity of such order, and it was also agreed that said Agreement for Con sent Order, together with the complaint, should constitute the entire record in the proceeding, upon which the initial decision should be based, and that the complaint in the matter might be used in construing the terms of the aforesaid order, which might be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided by statute for orders o f the Commission, and it was further provided that the signing of the Agreement for Consent Order was for settlement purposes only, and did not constitute an admission by respondents of any violation of law al leged in the complaint.
Thereafter said hearing examiner made his initial decision in which he set forth the aforesaid matters, and that for all legal purposes respondents answer would be regarded as withdrawn; set forth his conclusion, in view of the facts Continued on next page
CONTENTS
Agricultural Marketing Service
Pa&e
Proposed rule making:
Oranges, grapefruit and tange rines grown in Florida; han dling o f_____________________
Rules and regulations:
Oranges, Valencia, grown in Arizona and designated part of California; correction____

7399

7393

Agriculture Department See Agricultural Marketing Serv ice; Commodity Credit Corpora tion.

Army Department Rules and regulations:
Medical and dental attendance;
miscellaneous amendments__

7394

Atomic Energy Commission Notices:
Authorization of certain activi ties under Atomic Energy Act-

7399

Civil Aeronautics Board Notices:
Lake Central permanent certifi cation case; hearing---------

7400

Commodity Credit Corporation Rules and regulations:
Bean, New York, dry, edible;
1955 purchase agreement pro gram; correction___________

7393

Defense Department See Army Department.

Federal Communications Com mission Notices:
Hearings, etc.:
American Southern Broad casters W F W R -----------Booth Radio and Television Stations, Inc., and Eaton County Broadcasting Co Midwestern Broadcasting Co., and Straits Broadcasting Co_________ - ______________
Rollins Broadcasting, Inc., et al_________________________
WGNS, Inc__________________
Proposed rule making:
Stations on shipboard in the maritime services; limitation of certain frequencies to com munication pertaining to safety, operational or business purposes_____________________
7391

7400
7402
7401
7401
7400

7398