Coverage note: this corpus holds the
consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check
palegis.us.
§ 5304. Damages.
(a) Monetary damages.--Except to the extent that a material and prejudicial change of position prior to acquiring
knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation renders a monetary recovery inequitable,
a complainant is entitled to recover damages for misappropriation. Damages can include
both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by
misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss. In lieu
of damages measured by any other methods, the 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.
(b) Exemplary damages.--If willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award exemplary damages
in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a).
Notes of Decisions
PPG Indus. Inc v. Jiangsu Tie Mao Glass Co Ltd, 47 F.4th 156 (3rd Cir. 2022).
· cites it 3× “It asked for a permanent injunction; exemplary damages for TMG’s “willful and malicious” misappropriation, 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5304 (b); and attorneys’ fees.”
Bro-Tech Corp. v. Thermax, Inc., 651 F. Supp. 2d 378 (E.D. Pa. 2009).
“” 12 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5304(a). 242 . The issue is contested in Thermax’s co-pending Motion to suppress the expert testimony of Purolite’s damages expert.”
Alpha Pro Tech, Inc. v. VWR Int'l LLC, 984 F. Supp. 2d 425 (E.D. Pa. 2013).
“See 12 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5304 (“Damages can include both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss.”
Ppg Indus., Inc. v. Jiangsu Tie Mao Glass Co., Ltd. (W.D. Pa. 2020).
· cites it 4× “” 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5304 (a). The use of the conjunction “and” in the PUTSA damages provision gives courts a degree of flexibility in determining damages— both actual loss by the plaintiff and unjust enrichment by the defendant can be included in the damages figure, so long…”
Harbor Bus. Compliance Corp. v. Firstbase.io, Inc. (E.D. Pa. 2025).
“(quoting 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5304 (b)). However, a willful and malicious misappropriation alone does not necessarily mean that the prevailing party is entitled to exemplary damages.”
TCS Black Label v. Serhant Pennsylvania, 2026 Pa. Super. 17 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2026).
“” 12 Pa.C.S. § 5304(a). Nevertheless, “one cannot be held liable for damages for misappropriation of a trade secret without proof of actual harm through past use or disclosure[.”
— 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5304(a) — 3 cases
Bro-Tech Corp. v. Thermax, Inc., 651 F. Supp. 2d 378 (E.D. Pa. 2009).
“” 12 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5304(a). 242 . The issue is contested in Thermax’s co-pending Motion to suppress the expert testimony of Purolite’s damages expert.”
TCS Black Label v. Serhant Pennsylvania, 2026 Pa. Super. 17 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2026).
“” 12 Pa.C.S. § 5304(a). Nevertheless, “one cannot be held liable for damages for misappropriation of a trade secret without proof of actual harm through past use or disclosure[.”
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.