Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 688.001 (2025)
Short title.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 66
cases (24 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (M.D. Fla. 2001).
Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (M.D. Fla. 2001). “Fla. Stat. § 688.001 , et seq.; see Thomas v.”
Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. v. Dole Food Co., Inc., 136 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (S.D. Fla. 2001). “See Fla. Stat. § 688.001 et seq. Dole claims that Del Monte cannot state a claim for misappropriation of trade secrets under Florida law because a pineapple cannot be protected as a trade secret.”
Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. v. Dole Food Co., Inc., 148 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (S.D. Fla. 2001). “Funk and Dole alleging violations of Florida’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Fla.Stat. § 688.001 et seq. On October 31, 2000, Del Monte filed a motion for preliminary injunction.”
Sentry Data Sys., Inc. v. CVS Health, 361 F. Supp. 3d 1279 (S.D. Fla. 2018). “§ 1836 , and Florida Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 688.001 -009 Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.”
Am. Honda Motor Co. v. Motorcycle Info. Network, Inc., 390 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (M.D. Fla. 2005). “The Plaintiff does not dispute that the Defendants have properly stated a claim under Florida’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, §§ 688.001, et seq. (“FUTSA”). However, it argues that the remaining claims (deceptive and unfair trade prac *1173 tices, breach of oral confidentiality…”
Advantor Sys. Corp. v. DRS Technical Servs., Inc., 678 F. App'x 839 (11th Cir. 2017). “Procedural History Advantor sued DRS in April 2014 on three separate claims: breach of the NDA under Virginia law; tortious interference with contract under Florida law; and violation of Florida’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“FUTSA”), Fla. Stat. § 688.001 -.009. Advantor sought…”
Furmanite Am., Inc. v. T.D. Williamson, Inc., 506 F. Supp. 2d 1134 (M.D. Fla. 2007). “Furmanite alleges that Defendants’ actions amount to tortious interference with business relationships, (Count I), Trade Slander, (Count II), a violation of Section 688.001 et seq., Florida Statutes, (Count III), breach of confidentiality agreements, (Count IV), conversion,…”
Yellowfin Yachts, Inc. v. Barker Boatworks, LLC, 898 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2018). “We therefore also hold that the District Court properly rejected the rest of Yellowfin's claims related to trade dress and consumer confusion. We turn now to Yellowfin's remaining trade secret claim.”
Hennegan Co. v. Arriola, 855 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2012). “Before the Court now are Hennegan’s claims that Arriola and Grafika violated the FDUTPA (Count I); misappropriated Hennegan’s trade secrets in violation of Florida’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Fla. Stat. § 688.001 (Count III); breached the fiduciary duty of loyalty (Count II);…”
DynCorp Int'l v. AAR Airlift Grp., Inc., 664 F. App'x 844 (11th Cir. 2016). “The eight-count amended complaint alleged that AAR violated the Florida Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“FUTSA”), Fla. Stat. § 688.001 , et seq. (Count I); engaged in common-law conversion, tortious interference with contractual relations, tortious interference with existing and…”
Preferred Care Partners Holding Corp. v. Humana, Inc., 258 F.R.D. 684 (S.D. Fla. 2009). “PCP also sued Humana for monetary damages (Count III) and injunctive relief (Count IV) under the Florida Trade Secrets Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 688.001-688.009 , as well as for tortious interference with advantageous business relationships (Count V) and breach of fiduciary duty (Count…”
Medimport S.R.L. v. Cabreja, 929 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (S.D. Fla. 2013). “The elements of a claim for misappropriation of trade secrets under Florida’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Fla. Stat. § 688.001 et seq are: “(1) the plaintiff possessed secret information and took reasonable steps to protect its secrecy and (2) the secret it possessed was…”
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.