Federal Trade Commission v. Raladam Co
Citation | 62 S.Ct. 966,316 U.S. 149,86 L.Ed. 1336 |
Decision Date | 27 April 1942 |
Docket Number | No. 826,826 |
Parties | FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. RALADAM CO |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
Mr. Robert L. Stern, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Rockwell T. Gust, of Detroit, Mich., for respondent.
The Circuit Court of Appeals set aside a cease and desist order of the Federal Trade Commission upon the ground that certain findings were not supported by evidence. 6 Cir., 123 F.2d 34. The refusal of the court to enforce the Commission's order rested in part upon an interpreta- tion of this Court's decision in a prior controversy between the same parties. Federal Trade Comm. v. Raladam Co., 283 U.S. 643, 51 S.Ct. 587, 75 L.Ed. 1324, 79 A.L.R. 1191. Because of the importance of questions raised, we granted certiorari. 315 U.S. 790, 62 S.Ct. 631, 86 L.Ed. —-.
Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 719, 15 U.S.C. § 45, 15 U.S.C.A. § 45, declares unfair methods of competition in commerce to be unlawful; empowers the Commission to prevent such methods; and authorizes the Commission after hearings and findings of fact to issue orders requiring violators 'to cease and desist from using such method of competition.' In 1929, the Commission, after hearings, found that the Raladam Company had used unfair methods of competition in selling a preparation called Marmola by making misleading and deceptive statements concerning its qualities as a remedy for overweight. The Commission issued a cease and desist order which the Circuit Court of Appeals vacated. 6 Cir., 42 F.2d 430. This Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment saying that there was Federal Trade Comm. v. Raladam Co., supra, 283 U.S. pages 652, 653, 51 S.Ct. pages 591, 592, 75 L.Ed. 1324, 79 A.L.R. 1191. It is clear that the reasons for refusing to enforce the Commission's order are grounded upon the inadequacy of the findings and proof as revealed in the particular record then before this Court. Hence, these reasons are not controlling in this case, arising as it does out of different proceedings and presenting different facts and a different record for our consideration.
In 1935, the Commission instituted the present proceedings against Raladam, charging unfair methods of competition in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Hearings were held and much evidence was heard concerning Raladam's trade methods since the date of the earlier cease and desist order. This time the Commission found with meticulous particularity that Raladam had made many misleading and deceptive statements to further sales of Marmola; that Marmola had many active rivals for the trade of those who...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Federal Trade Commission v. Cement Institute
...v. Raladam Co., 283 U.S. 643, 647, 650, 51 S.Ct. 587, 591, 75 L.Ed. 1324, 79 A.L.R. 1191. And see Federal Trade Commission v. Raladam Co., 316 U.S. 149, 152, 62 S.Ct. 966, 968, 86 L.Ed. 1336. We cannot say that the Commission is wrong in concluding that the delivered-price system as here us......
-
North American Airlines v. Civil Aeronautics Board
...or tended thus to injure, the business of any competitor or of competitors generally . . .." Compare Federal Trade Comm. v. Raladam Co., 1942, 316 U.S. 149, 62 S.Ct. 966, 86 L.Ed. 1336. Federal Trade Comm. v. Royal Milling Co., 1933, 288 U.S. 212, 53 S.Ct. 335, 77 L.Ed. 706, enforced an ord......
-
Coates v. Lawrence
... ... the much higher plane of proper relations between the State and Federal governments, under our dual system, courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction ... ...
-
Buccheri, Application of
... ... 'For a conviction on a plea of guilty coerced by a federal law enforcement officer is no more consistent with due process than a ... ...
-
The Standard for Determining "unfair Acts or Practices" Under State Unfair Trade Practices Acts
...informed consumer decisions.") 71 43 Fed. Reg. at 59635-37. 72 FTC v. Raladam Co. 283 U.S. 643,647 (1931). See also FTC V. Raladam Co., 316 U.S. 149, 152 (1942); Fashion Originator's Guild of America, Inc. v. FTC, 312 U.S. 457,466 (1941); Progress Tailoring Co. v. FTC, 153 F.2d 103, 105 (7t......
-
On the Propriety of the Public Interest Requirement in the Washington Consumer Protection Act
...of the objects of the Act was to [prevent potential injury] by stopping the conduct in its incipiency." Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Raladam Co., 316 U.S. 149, 152 (1941); Trans World Accounts, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 594 F.2d 212 (9th Cir. 1979) (in which the Commission issued order against deb......
-
Fair Is Fair-reshaping Alaska's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act
...Inc., 101 P.3d 1047, 1052-53 (Alaska 2004). [146]See O'Neill Investigations, 609 P.2d at 534. [147]Id. at 534 (citing FTC v. Raladam Co., 316 U.S. 149, 152 (1942)). [148]Id. at 535 (quoting FTC v. Sperry and Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. 233, 244-45 n.5 (1972)); see also Kenai Chrysler Ctr., Inc......