Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 10
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 10, § 1543 (2026)

Injunctive relief

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  Misappropriation restrained or enjoined.  Actual or threatened misappropriation may be restrained or 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.  
[PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).]
2.  Exceptional circumstances.  In exceptional circumstances, an injunction may condition future use upon payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time for which use could have been prohibited.  
A. Exceptional circumstances include, but are not limited to, a material and prejudicial change of position prior to acquiring knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation that renders a prohibitive injunction inequitable.   [PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).]
[PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).]
3.  Protection of trade secret compelled.  In appropriate circumstances, affirmative acts to protect a trade secret may be compelled by court order.  
[PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).]
4.  Application.  This section applies to all forms of injunctive relief, including temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions and permanent injunctions.  
[PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1987, c. 143 (NEW).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: Spottiswoode v. Levine, 1999 ME 79 (Me. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Spottiswoode v. Levine, 1999 ME 79 (Me. 1999). “See 10 M.R.S.A. §§ 1543, 1544. As an initial matter, a court examining a claim under the UTSA must determine whether the information at issue constitutes a “trade secret,” as that term is defined in 10 M.”
Pearl Investments, LLC v. Stand. i/o, Inc., 297 F. Supp. 2d 335 (D. Me. 2004). · cites it 2× “Under 10 M.R.S.A. § 1543, a court may enjoin an actual or threatened misappropriation.”
Alcom LLC v. Temple (D. Me. 2020). “10 M.R.S. § 1543. In this context, “misappropriation” includes “[d]isclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who .”
Web Design & Consulting Servs. Inc v. Aragon (D. Me. 2025). “10 M.R.S. § 1543(1). Even if I assume that the Company proved its confidential information to be protectable trade secrets, see id.”
N. Benefits of Maine, LLC v. Mower (Me. Super. Ct 2014). “2 See 10 M.R.S. § 1543 (2013) ("Actual or threatened misappropriation may be restrained or enjoined.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 10, § 1543(1) — 1 case
Web Design & Consulting Servs. Inc v. Aragon (D. Me. 2025). “10 M.R.S. § 1543(1). Even if I assume that the Company proved its confidential information to be protectable trade secrets, see id.”
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.