Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 482B
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 482B-2 (2026)

] Definitions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     [§482B-2]  Definitions.  As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise:

     "Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic or other means.

     "Misappropriation" means:

     (1)  Acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or

     (2)  Disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who:

          (A)  Used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; or

          (B)  At the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that the person's knowledge of the trade secret was:

              (i)  Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it;

             (ii)  Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or

            (iii)  Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or

          (C)  Before a material change of the person's position, knew or has reason to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by accident or mistake.

     "Person" means a natural person, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision or agency, or any other legal or commercial entity.

     "Trade secret" means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program device, method, technique, or process that:

     (1)  Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and

     (2)  Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. [L 1989, c 221, pt of §1]

 

Case Notes

 

  A contact list, as alleged by plaintiff, is similar to a customer list, which courts generally find to be protected as a trade secret.  780 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (2011).

  Improper retention and use of confidential information to solicit proposed funding qualifies as misappropriation of a trade secret as contemplated by this chapter.  780 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (2011).

  Under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Hawaii Uniform Trade Secrets Act, plaintiff, a drug testing services provider, was granted a preliminary injunction against defendants, a competitor and former employees; where plaintiff had lost at least six clients to defendants due to their misappropriation of client information, which was a protected trade secret, as well as lying to clients about plaintiff's viability and loss of accreditation.  Plaintiff lost, and would continue to lose, goodwill in the eyes of its clients and was likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief.  341 F. Supp. 3d 1147 (2018).

  Trade secrets may be subject to equitable division pursuant to §580-47, depending upon when the right to the trade secret vested.  99 H. 101, 53 P.3d 240.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2010–2025 · leading case: BlueEarth Biofuels, LLC v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., 780 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (D. Haw. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
BlueEarth Biofuels, LLC v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., 780 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (D. Haw. 2011). · cites it 8× “¶¶ 85-89); • Ninth: misappropriation of trade secrets against all Defendants in violation of Haw.Rev.Stat. § 482B-2 (Id. ¶¶ 90-93); • Tenth: conversion against all Defendants (Id.”
BlueEarth Biofuels, LLC v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., 235 P.3d 310 (Haw. 2010). · cites it 2× “Does HUTSA also preempt, or displace, claims based upon the alleged misuse of “confidential information,” which is determined, before or during trial, not to meet the definition of “trade secret” under HRS § 482B-2? I. BACKGROUND A. Factual Background This case involves plans to…”
Moddha Interactive, Inc. v. Philips Elec. North Am. Corp., 92 F. Supp. 3d 982 (D. Haw. 2015). · cites it 3× “See HRS § 482B-2; Cal. Civ. Code § 3426.1 (b).”
Prudential Locations, LLC v. Gagnon., 506 P.3d 134 (Haw. 2022). “HRS § 482B-2 (2008). 20 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** someone to start up a new competing enterprise against you, essentially with your stuff.”
Prudential Locations, LLC v. Gagnon (Haw. 2022). “11 HRS § 482B-2 (2008). 11 We note that as part of the reasonableness analysis, Gagnon had argued that consumers should be able to choose their own providers of real estate services.”
S&G Labs Hawaii, LLC v. Graves (D. Haw. 2021). “(quoting Haw. Rev. Stat. § 482B-2). Thus, “[t]o prevail on a HUTSA claim, a plaintiff must establish that there exists a trade secret and a misappropriation of that trade secret,” and the same elements are required to prove a DTSA claim.”
Keco Capital, LLC v. Wong (D. Haw. 2025). “§ 1839 (3); see also Haw. Rev. Stat. § 482B-2 (providing similar definition).”
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.