From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Damar Products, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Oct 29, 1962
309 F.2d 323 (3d Cir. 1962)

Opinion

No. 13929.

Argued October 19, 1962.

Decided October 29, 1962.

Leonard M. Speier, New York City (Blum, Jolles, Haimoff, Szabad Gersen, New York City. Daniel Gersen, New York City, of counsel, on the brief) for petitioners.

John Gordon Underwood, Washington, D.C. (James McI. Henderson, General Counsel, J.B. Truly, Assistant General Counsel, Miles J. Brown, Attys., on the brief), for the Federal Trade Commission.

Before McLAUGHLIN and HASTIE, Circuit Judges, and DUMBAULD, District Judge.


Respondent found that petitioners had falsely advertised their particular product involved and issued a cease and desist order against petitioners. The evidence in the matter clearly supports the finding of the Commission and its order. Though not abandoning their defense as to the merits, petitioners' major effort on this appeal has been to show that they have in good faith complied with the order and that they have offered complete assurance of their firm purpose of not violating the order. Therefore, urge the petitioners, the order should be vacated.

We must disagree. The record fully justifies the Commission's course of insisting that its order should remain in effect. Spencer Gifts, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, 302 F.2d 267 (3 Cir. 1962); C. Howard Hunt Pen Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 197 F.2d 273 (3 Cir. 1952).

The order of the Commission will be affirmed and enforced.


Summaries of

Damar Products, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Oct 29, 1962
309 F.2d 323 (3d Cir. 1962)
Case details for

Damar Products, Inc. v. United States

Case Details

Full title:DAMAR PRODUCTS, INC., a Corporation Also Doing Business as Mrs. Dorothy…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Oct 29, 1962

Citations

309 F.2d 323 (3d Cir. 1962)

Citing Cases

Stauffer Laboratories, Inc. v. F.T.C

This is not the first time in which the Commission has had to deal with this problem. Thus, In re Damar…