Cite as 24 A.D. 782 CONCLUSIONS By reason of the facts set out in Findings of Fact 2 and 3, it is concluded that respondent has violated section 202 (a) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 192(a)) and section 201.43 (b) of the regulations (9 CFR 201.43 (b)). Inasmuch as respondent has consented that an order be issued requiring it to cease and desist from the practices complained of in the Complaint and complainant has recommended that such an order be issued, the order will be issued. ORDER Respondent shall cease and desist from: (1) purchasing livestock in commerce while its current liabilities exceed its current assets without paying for such livestock at the time of purchase; and (2) purchasing livestock in commerce and failing to pay the seller of the livestock or his duly authorized agent the full amount of the purchase price of such livestock when payment is due. This order shall become effective six days after service. (No. 9889) In re NELSON P. CAMIRE, d/b/a NELSON P. CAMIRE AND SON. P&S Docket No. 3478. Decided June 7, 1965. Bonding requirements-Cease and desist-Consent Respondent is ordered to cease and desist from engaging in business in any capacity for which bonding is required under the act and the regulations without filing and maintaining a reasonable bond or its equivalent, as required by the act and the regulations. Mr. Samuel J. Harris for complainant. Mr. Jose M. Monte, Barre, Vermont, for respondent. Decision by Thomas J. Flavin, Judicial Officer PRELIMINARY STATEMENT This is a disciplinary proceeding under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (7 U.S.C. 181 Cite as 24 A.D. 782 et seq.), hereinafter referred to as the Act, instituted by a complaint filed March 11, 1965, by the Director, Packers and Stockyards Division, United States Department of Agriculture, charging that respondent violated the bonding provisions of the Act and regulations thereunder (9 CFR 201.1 et seq.). On April 22, 1965, respondent filed an amended answer in which he admits the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint, neither admits nor denies the remaining allegations; states that for the purposes of this proceeding and for such purposes only, the order in this proceeding may contain findings of fact and conclusions based upon the allegations of the complaint as the findings of fact and conclusions of the Secretary; waives oral hearing and the report of the Hearing Examiner; and consents to the issuance of an order requiring him to cease and desist from the practices complained of in said complaint, and suspending his registration under the Act until such time as he complies with the bonding requirements of the Act and regulations. Complainant has recommended that the cease and desist provisions of the order consented to by respondent be issued, but that respondent not be suspended as a registrant under the Act, as respondent has complied with the bonding requirements of the Act and the regulations since filing the amended answer. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Gallerani's Commission Sale, Inc. stockyard, Bradford, Vermont, and East Thetford Commission Sale stockyard, East Thetford, Vermont, hereinafter referred to as the stockyards, are now, and were at all times material herein, posted stockyards subject to the provisions of the Act. 2. Respondent, Nelson P. Camire, is an individual doing business as Nelson P. Camire and Son and whose business address is Box 65, Barre, Vermont. 3. Respondent is now, and was at all times material herein, engaged in the business of a livestock dealer in commerce within the meaning of the Act and is now, and was at all times material herein, registered with the Secretary as a dealer under the Act. 4. The surety bond which respondent maintained to secure performance of his dealer obligations under the Act was terminated on January 15, 1965. By letters dated December 7, 1964 and February 4, 1965, the Area Supervisor, Packers and Stockyards Division, United States Department of Agriculture, for the Area Cite as 24 A.D. 784 that includes the State of Vermont, notified respondent of such termination date and informed him that he would have to furnish the required bond if he continued to engage in business as a livestock dealer in commerce after such termination. Not withstanding said notices, respondent continued to engage in the business of a dealer, buying and selling livestock at the stockyards for his own account, without filing and maintaining a reasonable bond or its equivalent, as required by the Act and regulations thereunder. CONCLUSIONS By reason of the facts set forth in Finding of Fact 4, it is concluded that respondent has wilfully violated section 312 (a) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 213 (a)) and sections 201.29 and 201.30 of the regulations (9 CFR 201.29 and 201.30). Complainant has recommended that the cease and desist order consented to by respondent be issued. The order will be issued. ORDER Respondent shall cease and desist from engaging in business in any capacity for which bonding is required under the Act and the regulations without filing and maintaining a reasonable bond or its equivalent, as required by the Act and the regulations. This order shall become effective on the sixth day after service thereof upon the respondent and copies hereof shall be served upon the parties. (No. 9890) In re PEARL PACKING COMPANY, INC. P&S Docket No. 3431. Decided June 7, 1965. Packer-Failure to pay in full-Cease and desist-Consent Respondent is ordered to cease and desist from purchasing livestock in commerce and failing to pay, without just cause, the full price agreed upon at time of sale. Mr. Donald E. Graham for complainant. Cooper, Cooper, Cooper & Cox, Madison, Ind., for respondent. Decision by Thomas J. Flavin, Judicial Officer Cite as 24 A.D. 784 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT This is a disciplinary proceeding under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (7 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), hereinafter referred to as the Act, instituted by a Complaint filed on December 7, 1964, by the Director, Packers and Stockyards Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, United States Department of Agriculture. The Complaint charges that respondent violated certain provisions of the Act. The respondent is a packer within the meaning of the Act. On May 20, 1965, respondent filed an amended answer in which it admits the jurisdictional allegations of the Complaint, admits the facts alleged in paragraphs III, V, and VI of the Complaint, however, respondent denies the wilfulness of the violations. Respondent denied the allegation of paragraph IV and complainant moved that allegation IV of the Complaint be dismissed. Complainant has recommended that the order consented to by respondent be issued and respondent waives oral hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent, Pearl Packing Company, Inc., is a corporation whose address is 710 North West Street, Madison, Indiana. Respondent is now, and was at all times material herein a "packer" within the meaning of that term as defined in the Act, in that respondent is now, and was at all times material herein, engaged in the business of buying livestock in commerce for purposes of slaughter and marketing meats and meat food products in commerce. 2. (a) The O. K. Stockyards, Maysville, Kentucky, Ratliff Stock Yards, Mt. Sterling, Kentucky, Farmers Stockyards, Flemingsburg, Kentucky, are now and were at all times material herein, posted stockyards subject to the provisions of the Act. (b) The O. K. Stockyards, Inc., Maysville, Kentucky, Ratliff Stockyards, Mt. Sterling, Kentucky, Farmers Stock Yards, Flemingsburg, Kentucky, are now and were at all times material herein, registered with the Secretary of Agriculture as market agencies under the Act. 3. Respondent, on or about January 3, 1964, purchased 58 head of veal calves at O. K. Stockyards, Maysville, Kentucky, in open competitive bidding at public auction at an agreed price per hundredweight based on stockyard weights. After receipt of Cite as 24 A.D. 784 the said veal calves at respondent's packing plant for slaughter, respondent without reasonable cause, deducted $60.28 from the purchase price shown on the buyer's bill indicating that such deduction was for "excess shrinkage" of 175 pounds and remitted to O. K. Stock Yards, Inc. $60.28 less than the agreed purchase price. 4. Respondent, on or about January 4, 1964, purchased 94 head of veal calves at Farmers Stockyards, Flemingsburg, Kentucky, in open competitive bidding at public auction at an agreed price per hundredweight based on stockyard weights. After receipt of the said veal calves at respondent's packing plant for slaughter, respondent, without reasonable cause, deducted $56.98 from the purchase price shown on the buyer's bill indicating that such deduction was for "excess shrinkage" of 185 pounds and remitted to Farmers Stock Yards $56.98 less than the agreed purchase price. 5. Respondent, on or about January 24, 1964, purchased 43 head of veal calves at O. K. Stockyards, Maysville, Kentucky, in open competitive bidding at public auction at an agreed price per hundredweight based on stockyard weights. After receipt of the said veal calves at respondent's packing plant for slaughter, respondent, without reasonable cause, deducted $22.40 from the purchase price shown on the buyer's bill indicating that such deduction was for "excess shrinkage" of 85 pounds and remitted to O. K. Stock Yards, Inc. $22.40 less than the agreed purchase price. CONCLUSIONS By reason of the facts set forth in Findings of Fact 3, 4, and 5 hereof, it is concluded that respondent has engaged in, and used, an unfair, unjustly discriminatory, and deceptive practice and device in commerce in violation of section 202 (a) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 192(a)). Complainant has moved that allegation IV of the Complaint be dismissed and it will be dismissed. Respondent has consented to the order set forth below and complainant has recommended that such order be issued. ORDER Allegation IV of the Complaint is hereby dismissed. Respondent shall cease and desist from purchasing livestock |