26 N.W.2d 647 | Wis. | 1947
This was an action by the state of Wisconsin, upon information of S. Richard Heath, district attorney in and for Fond du Lac county, Wisconsin, against Tankar Gas, Inc., a foreign corporation, commenced on November 14, 1945, to enjoin defendant from violating the provisions of sec.
FREE
Friday Thru Monday
Gallons 2 Gasoline
(You Pay The Tax)
With each 7 gallon purchase of Tankar Super Gasoline — October 5 thru October 8 Higher Octane NOW More Mileage Smoother Performance Once you try it — you'll always buy it
TANKAR STATION
295 West Scott St. 253 North Main St.
The state contends that this advertisement violated sec.
"(1) Policy. The practice of selling certain items of merchandise below cost in order to attract patronage is generally a form of deceptive advertising and an unfair method of competition in commerce. . . ."
Sub. (2)(j), sec.
"(j) When one or more items are advertised, offered for sale, or sold with one or more other items at a combined price, or are advertised, offered as a gift, or given with the sale of one or more other items, each and all of said items shall for the purposes of this section be deemed to be advertised, offered for sale, or sold, and the price of each item named shall be governed by the provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (2) hereof."
Sub. (3) sec.
"(3) Illegality of loss leaders. Any advertising, offer to sell, or sale of any merchandise either by retailers or wholesalers, *221 at less than cost as defined in this section, with the intent, or effect of inducing the purchase of other merchandise or of unfairly diverting trade from a competitor, impairs and prevents fair competition, injures public welfare, and is unfair competition and contrary to public policy and the policy of this section.
The balance of sub. (2), sec.
Since the two gallons of gasoline advertised as free with the purchase of seven gallons were "offered as a gift, or given with the sale of one or more other items" sec.
The controversy is narrow, it being the contention of the state that the two gallons of gas shall have separately applied to them the cost requirements of sec.
In support of its contention the state points out that sec.
The state claims that in any case this is a deceptive form of advertising and within the general condemnation of the statute, but sub. (1) of sec.
This conclusion conforms to the court's view of the act heretofore expressed in State v. Twentieth Century Market,
By Court. — Order reversed, and cause remanded with directions to grant defendant's motion for a summary judgment. *224