From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Federal Trade Commission v. Bradley

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Mar 18, 1929
31 F.2d 569 (2d Cir. 1929)

Opinion

Nos. 129, 157.

March 18, 1929.

Appeal from the United States Federal Trade Commission.

Proceeding by the Federal Trade Commission against James J. Bradley, doing business under the trade-name and style of James J. Bradley Co. From an order of the Commission requiring him to desist from the use of the word "English" in designation of, or in advertising, branding, labeling, or description of, soap sold and distributed by him in interstate commerce unless such soap be manufactured in England, James J. Bradley appeals. Affirmed.

The Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint charging respondent Bradley with the use of unfair methods of competition in interstate commerce, in violation of Federal Trade Commission Act, § 5, approved September 26, 1914 (15 USCA § 45). The complaint alleges that respondent is engaged in interstate commerce, and sells toilet and bath soaps to retail dealers located in different states, among which is a soap designated as "English Tub Soap," on each cake of which is stamped in large conspicuous letters the phrases "English Tub Soap" and "Hanson-Jenks, Limited, London, New York," and that around each cake of soap he causes to be placed a paper band on which is printed in large and conspicuous letters the phrases "English Tub Soap" and "James J. Bradley Company, sole agent U.S. and Canada." The complaint further alleges that toilet and bath soaps manufactured in England have for many years enjoyed widespread popularity, good will, and demand among the consuming public throughout the United States, many of whom believe that toilet soaps manufactured in England are superior in quality and other desirable characteristics to bath soaps manufactured in the United States, and that they therefore purchase such soaps manufactured in England and imported into the United States in preference to soaps manufactured in the United States, and that respondent's use of word "English" on such soap has a tendency to and does mislead and deceive many of the retail dealers and consumers into believing that said soap is manufactured in England and imported into the United States, and to purchase said soap in that belief, though in truth it is manufactured in the United States.

The Commission made findings following the allegations of the complaint and entered the following order:

"It is now ordered that respondent James J. Bradley, his agents, servants, and employees, do cease and desist from the use of the word `English' in the designation of, or in the advertising, branding, labeling, or description of, soap sold and distributed by him in interstate commerce, unless said soap be manufactured in England."

James M. Brinson, Robert E. Healy, Adrien F. Busick, and Alfred M. Craven, all of Washington, D.C., for Federal Trade Commission.

Walter D. Yankauer and Schaffer Lake, all of New York City, for Bradley.

Before L. HAND, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.


The order to cease and desist of the Federal Trade Commission of January 21, 1928, is affirmed, and an order of this court will be entered perpetually enjoining James J. Bradley in the terms of said order to cease and desist.


Summaries of

Federal Trade Commission v. Bradley

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Mar 18, 1929
31 F.2d 569 (2d Cir. 1929)
Case details for

Federal Trade Commission v. Bradley

Case Details

Full title:FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. BRADLEY. BRADLEY v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Mar 18, 1929

Citations

31 F.2d 569 (2d Cir. 1929)

Citing Cases

MULHENS KROPFF v. FERD MUELHENS, INC.

Independent Baking Powder Co. v. Boorman, supra. Indeed, in such cases, if private individuals fail to act,…

H.N. Heusner Son v. Federal Trade Commission

The work of the Federal Trade Commission has been along similar lines, Derenberg, Trade-Mark Protection and…