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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-108 (2026)

Effect on other law

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

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, this article displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.

(2) This article does not affect:

(a) Contractual remedies, whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret;

(b) Other civil remedies that are not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret; or

(c) Criminal remedies, whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret.

Source: L. 86: Entire article added, p. 462, § 1, effective July 1.

Cross references: For theft of trade secrets, see § 18-4-408.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc., 2019 CO 31 (Colo. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc., 2019 CO 31 (Colo. 2019). · cites it 4× “¶56 Section 7-74-108(1) of the UTSA states that, subject to exceptions for contractual remedies, other civil remedies not based on the misappropriation of trade secrets, or criminal remedies, the UTSA “displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of 4 this state…”
L-3 Commc'ns Corp. v. Jaxon Eng'g & Maint., Inc., 863 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (D. Colo. 2012). · cites it 2× “With regard to the Defendants’ argument that C.R.S. § 7-74-108 preempts any tort claims of unjust enrichment premised upon claims of misappropriated trade secrets, the Court finds the reasoning in Powell Products, Inc.”
Great Am. Opportunities, Inc. v. Kent, 352 F. Supp. 3d 1126 (D. Colo. 2018). · cites it 2× “" Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-108 (2)(a). Other courts have interpreted this language to mean that the legislature intended to provide a statutory remedy under CUTSA in addition to any contractual remedy.”
Powell Prods., Inc. v. Marks, 948 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1996). · cites it 2× “Colo.Rev.Stat. § 7-74-108 states: (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, this article displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”
SGS Acquisition Co. v. Linsley, 352 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D. Colo. 2018). · cites it 2× “C.R.S. § 7-74-108(1). Subsection (1) reads: *1125 (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, this article displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”
Hawg Tools, LLC v. Newsco Int'l Energy Servs., Inc, 2016 COA 176 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Defendants Waived the Defense of Preemption ¶ 40 Defendants contend that the trial court erred when it denied their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on Hawg’s conversion claim, which alleges that they “committed unauthorized acts of dominion, control, and…”
Larsen v. Consol. Pet Foods, Inc. (In Re S & D Foods, Inc.), 144 B.R. 121 (Bankr.D. Colo. 1992). · cites it 2× “See, C.R.S. § 7-74-108. There is no Colorado law interpreting the statute.”
Bishop & Co. v. Cuomo, 799 P.2d 444 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Nor does § 7-74-108, C.R.S. (1986 Repl. Vol. 3A), which provides that the Uniform Trade Secrets Act “displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret,” create such a conflict.”
M.M.A. Design LLC v. Capella Space Corp. (D. Colo. 2019). · cites it 2× “” C.R.S. § 7-74-108(1), (2). MMA concedes that, to the extent its common-law claims are predicated on trade secrets, they would be preempted.”
DTC Energy Grp., Inc. v. Hirschfeld (D. Colo. 2019). · cites it 2× “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-108 . The Court agrees with Powell Prods.”
Combs (D. Colo. 2026). · cites it 2× “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-108 (1). In other words, “CUTSA preempts common law claims that ‘conflict’ with its trade secret misappropriation provisions.”
Zvelo, Inc. v. Akamai Tech., Inc. (D. Colo. 2019). “§ 7-74-108 (1) (“[T]his article displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret”).”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-74-108(1) — 3 cases
Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc., 2019 CO 31 (Colo. 2019). “¶56 Section 7-74-108(1) of the UTSA states that, subject to exceptions for contractual remedies, other civil remedies not based on the misappropriation of trade secrets, or criminal remedies, the UTSA “displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of 4 this state…”
SGS Acquisition Co. v. Linsley, 352 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D. Colo. 2018). “C.R.S. § 7-74-108(1). Subsection (1) reads: *1125 (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, this article displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”
M.M.A. Design LLC v. Capella Space Corp. (D. Colo. 2019). “” C.R.S. § 7-74-108(1), (2). MMA concedes that, to the extent its common-law claims are predicated on trade secrets, they would be preempted.”
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.