Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 600A - TRADE SECRETS (UNIFORM ACT)
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 600A.050 (2026)

Misappropriation: Damages

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 600A.050  Misappropriation: Damages.

      1.  Except to the extent that a material and prejudicial change of position before acquiring knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation renders a monetary recovery inequitable, a complainant is entitled to recover damages for misappropriation. Damages include both loss caused by misappropriation and unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing the loss. In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, damages caused by misappropriation may be measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator’s unauthorized disclosure or use of a trade secret.

      2.  If willful, wanton or reckless misappropriation or disregard of the rights of the owner of the trade secret exists, the court may award exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding twice the award made under subsection 1.

      (Added to NRS by 1987, 20; A 1999, 2102)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Frantz v. Johnson, 999 P.2d 351 (Nev. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Frantz v. Johnson, 999 P.2d 351 (Nev. 2000). · cites it 6× “We conclude that the district court erred in calculating compensatory damages and in failing to consider NRS 600A.050(2) before awarding punitive damages.”
H&H Pharm., LLC v. Chattem Chemicals, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02148 (D. Nev. Aug. 29, 2025). · cites it 3× “See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 600A.050. 4 Whether Chattem breached a contractual promise to maintain the secrecy of H&H’s trade secrets or to limit their use by Sun is relevant to whether Chattem or 5 Sun misappropriated them.”
H&H Pharm., LLC v. Chattem Chemicals, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02148 (D. Nev. Dec. 28, 2022). “See NRS 600A.050(1). 1 hard and fast rules for determining whether a confidential relationship exists.”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 600A.050(1): 1 case
H&H Pharm., LLC v. Chattem Chemicals, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02148 (D. Nev. Dec. 28, 2022). “See NRS 600A.050(1). 1 hard and fast rules for determining whether a confidential relationship exists.”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 600A.050(2): 2 cases
Frantz v. Johnson, 999 P.2d 351 (Nev. 2000). “We conclude that the district court erred in calculating compensatory damages and in failing to consider NRS 600A.050(2) before awarding punitive damages.”
H&H Pharm., LLC v. Chattem Chemicals, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02148 (D. Nev. Aug. 29, 2025). “See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 600A.050. 4 Whether Chattem breached a contractual promise to maintain the secrecy of H&H’s trade secrets or to limit their use by Sun is relevant to whether Chattem or 5 Sun misappropriated them.”
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.