Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 7
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-101 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Trade Secrets Act".

Source: L. 86: Entire article added, p. 460, § 1, effective July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 50 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Re/Max, LLC v. Quicken Loans Inc., 295 F. Supp. 3d 1163 (D. Colo. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Re/Max, LLC v. Quicken Loans Inc., 295 F. Supp. 3d 1163 (D. Colo. 2018). · cites it 2× “1993) (citing Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-101 et seq. ). The Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act defines a "trade secret" as: any scientific or technical information, design, process, procedure, formula, improvement, confidential business or…”
Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc., 2019 CO 31 (Colo. 2019). “In contrast, by allowing BlueRadios’s civil theft claim to proceed, the majority inappropriately overrides the General Assembly’s express intent in enacting the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, sections 7-74-101 to -110, C.R.S. (2018) (“UTSA”).”
Powell Prods., Inc. v. Marks, 948 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1996). · cites it 4× “Defendants argue that several of plaintiffs claims are preempted by Colorado’s version of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Colo.Rev. Stat. § 7-74-101 et seq. (1986).”
Gognat v. Ellsworth, 259 P.3d 497 (Colo. 2011). “See §§ 7-74-101 to -110, C.R.S. (2010) ("Uniform Trade Secrets Act").”
L-3 Commc'ns Corp. v. Jaxon Eng'g & Maint., Inc., 125 F. Supp. 3d 1155 (D. Colo. 2015). · cites it 2× “Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (# 1185) In this motion, the Defendants seek summary judgment on: (i) Claim VII in L-3’s Amended Complaint (# 33), which sounds in misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of Colorado’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”), C.R.S. §…”
L-3 Commc'ns Corp. v. Jaxon Eng'g & Maint., Inc., 863 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (D. Colo. 2012). · cites it 2× “; and (iv) conspiracy to violate COCCA, all based on essentially the same facts as the RICO claim(s); (v) and (vi) patent infringement, apparently asserted only against Jaxon, on the grounds that Jaxon is infringing upon two patents owned by L3; (vii) violation of the Colorado…”
DigitalGlobe, Inc. v. Paladino, 269 F. Supp. 3d 1112 (D. Colo. 2017). · cites it 2× “Paladino responds by invoking the statutory definition of “trade secret” under the Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”), Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 7-74-101 to -110. That definition is as follows: “Trade secret” means the whole or any portion or phase of any scientific or…”
Shell v. Am. Fam. Rights Ass'n, 899 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (D. Colo. 2012). · cites it 2× “1993) (citing Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act, C.R.S. § 7-74-101 et seq.). *1056 Ms. Swallow The Complaint alleges that the materials Ms.”
SGS Acquisition Co. v. Linsley, 352 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D. Colo. 2018). · cites it 2× “To prove a claim of misappropriation of trade secrets under the Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act ( C.R.S. § 7-74-101 et seq. ), a plaintiff must establish the following elements: 1) that it possessed a valid trade secret, 2) that the trade secret was disclosed or used by the…”
Saturn Sys., Inc. v. Militare, 252 P.3d 516 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). “2010, defines a trade secret as: [The whole or any portion or phase of any scientific or technical information, design, process, procedure, formula, improvement, confidential business or financial information, listing of names, addresses, or telephone numbers, or other…”
Gatx Mgmt. Servs., LLC v. Weakland, 171 F. Supp. 2d 1159 (D. Colo. 2001). · cites it 2× “Accordingly, the Trade Secrets consti *1165 tuted trade secret information belonging to GPS under C.R.S. § 7-74-101, et seq. 16. Weakland has misappropriated, improperly used, misused and improperly disclosed the Trade Secrets belonging to GPS and GMS.”
Energex Enter., Inc. v. Anthony Doors, Inc., 250 F. Supp. 2d 1278 (D. Colo. 2003). · cites it 3× “Trade Secret Claims In its fourth and fifth claims for relief, Energex alleges Anthony misappropriated its trade secrets and thereby violated the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, C.R.S. § 7-74-101 et. seq., and engaged in unfair competition.”
Show all 50 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.