Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 24-2-3-3 (2026)

Injunction against misappropriation; exceptional circumstances

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 3. (a) Actual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined. Upon application to the court, an injunction shall be terminated when the trade secret has ceased to exist, but the injunction may be continued for an additional reasonable period of time in order to eliminate commercial advantage that otherwise would be derived from the misappropriation.

(b) If the court determines in exceptional circumstances that it would be unreasonable to prohibit future use, an injunction may condition future use upon payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time the use could have been prohibited.

As added by Acts 1982, P.L.148, SEC.1. Amended by P.L.50-1984, SEC.3.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 25 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: U.S. Land Servs., Inc. v. U.S. Surveyor, Inc., 826 N.E.2d 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

U.S. Land Servs., Inc. v. U.S. Surveyor, Inc., 826 N.E.2d 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 16× “The comments to section 2 of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, upon which our statute is based, provide: Section 2(a) of this Act [see Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3 (a) ] adopts the position of the trend of authority limiting the duration of injunc-tive relief to the extent of the temporal…”

Infinity Prods., Inc. v. Quandt, 810 N.E.2d 1028 (Ind. 2004). · cites it 4× “Ind.Code Ann. § 24-2-3-3. And it authorizes the award of attorney's fees upon conditions more liberal than most parts of our code.”

Hydraulic Exch. & Repair, Inc. v. KM Specialty Pumps, Inc., 690 N.E.2d 782 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3. The IUTSA defines “misappropriation” of a trade secret as: (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…”

M.K. Plastics Corp. v. Rossi, 838 N.E.2d 1068 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3(a). MK. Plastics argues that the record shows that Rossi "systematically harvested technical data," Appellant's Br.”

Craig Vickery v. Ardagh Glass, Inc., 85 N.E.3d 852 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Indiana Code section 24-2-3-3(a) provides that actual or threatened misappropriation of trade secrets may be enjoined.”

Ackerman v. Kimball Int'l, Inc., 652 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. 1995). · cites it 2× “]" Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3(a). And indeed, the injunction issued in this case is much broader than the covenant not to compete in paragraph 4 of Ackerman's employment agreement: the injunction forbade Ackerman from "[alecepting or commencing direct or indirect employment with…”

Steenhoven v. Coll. Life Ins. Co. of Am., 460 N.E.2d 973 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “" Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3 (1982). Misappropriation includes the "use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who .”

Avidair Helicopter Supply, Inc. v. Rolls-Royce Corp., 663 F.3d 966 (8th Cir. 2011). “AvidAir offers no argument as to how the district court abused its discretion, other than reiterating that the trade secrets were obtained lawfully, and thus not misappropriated. The district court found, and we agree, this argument was not supported by the record.”

Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Lockhart, 5 F. Supp. 2d 667 (S.D. Ind. 1998). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3. There is no evidence that Lock-hart took with him from Firestone Building Products any documents or other records containing Firestone Building Products trade secrets.”

Flotec, Inc. v. S. Rsch., Inc., 16 F. Supp. 2d 992 (S.D. Ind. 1998). · cites it 2× “See Ind. Code §§ 24-2-3-3 & -4. The critical concepts in the trade secret act are contained in the statutory definitions.”

Stand. Register Co. v. Cleaver, 30 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (N.D. Ind. 1998). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3. However, the IUTSA defines a “trade secret” as: [I]nformation, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, fi’om not being generally known to,…”

Distrib. Serv., Inc. v. Stevenson, 16 F. Supp. 3d 964 (S.D. Ind. 2014). · cites it 2× “And finally, the Indiana Supreme Court noted in Ackerman that the trial court had based the injunctive relief it granted on Indiana Code § 24-2-3-3 (giving trial court broad discretion to grant injunctive relief “to eliminate commercial advantage that otherwise would be derived…”

Show all 25 citing cases →

— Ind. Code § 24-2-3-3(a) — 6 cases

U.S. Land Servs., Inc. v. U.S. Surveyor, Inc., 826 N.E.2d 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “The comments to section 2 of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, upon which our statute is based, provide: Section 2(a) of this Act [see Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3 (a) ] adopts the position of the trend of authority limiting the duration of injunc-tive relief to the extent of the temporal…”

M.K. Plastics Corp. v. Rossi, 838 N.E.2d 1068 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3(a). MK. Plastics argues that the record shows that Rossi "systematically harvested technical data," Appellant's Br.”

Craig Vickery v. Ardagh Glass, Inc., 85 N.E.3d 852 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “Indiana Code section 24-2-3-3(a) provides that actual or threatened misappropriation of trade secrets may be enjoined.”

Ackerman v. Kimball Int'l, Inc., 652 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. 1995). “]" Ind.Code § 24-2-3-3(a). And indeed, the injunction issued in this case is much broader than the covenant not to compete in paragraph 4 of Ackerman's employment agreement: the injunction forbade Ackerman from "[alecepting or commencing direct or indirect employment with…”

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.