Hollen v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding counterfeiting as a matter of law when defendant used the word \Tiffany\ on display sign next to rings stamped with generic marks, because \[t]here is no statutory requirement that the counterfeit mark be placed on the product itself\
• finding counterfeiting as a matter of law when defendant used the word “Tiffany” on display sign next to rings stamped with generic marks, because “[t]here is no statutory requirement that the counterfeit mark be placed on the product itself”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).