As used in this chapter, which may be cited as the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, unless the context requires otherwise:
"Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, use of a computer or computer network without authority, breach of a duty 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 his knowledge of the trade secret was
(1) Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it;
(2) Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use;
(3) Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or
(4) 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 but not limited to, 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.
1986, c. 210; 2009, cc. 321, 376.
Notes of Decisions
Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Areva NP, Inc., 788 S.E.2d 237 (Va. 2016).
· cites it 8× “("Areva") against Babcock & Wilcox Company ("B & W") and affiliated companies (collectively, the "B & W defendants") for breach of contract and violation of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Code §§ 59.1-336 to -343. The B & W defendants appeal on various grounds, claiming…”
Darton Envtl., Inc. v. Fjuvo Collections, LLC, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1022 (W.D. Va. 2018).
· cites it 18× “Count VI: Violation of Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act Va. Code § 59.1-336 Finally, Plaintiff alleges all Defendants violated the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act.”
MicroStrategy Inc. v. Li, 601 S.E.2d 580 (Va. 2004).
· cites it 12× “In this appeal, we consider whether the chancellor erred in holding that the plaintiff failed to meet its burden of proving that the defendants misappropriated certain trade secrets, within the meaning of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (the Act), Code §§ 59.1-336 through…”
Navar, Inc. v. Fed. Bus. Council, 784 S.E.2d 296 (Va. 2016).
· cites it 4× “25 million judgment for breach of a non-disclosure agreement and misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("the Act"), Code § 59.1-336 et seq. Federal Business Council ("FBC") and Worldwide Solutions, Inc.”
MicroStrategy, Inc. v. Bus. Objects, S.A., 331 F. Supp. 2d 396 (E.D. Va. 2004).
· cites it 8× “Requirements of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act The tort of misappropriation of trade secrets is codified in the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (VUTSA), Va.Code Ann. §§ 59.1-336 to 59.1-343. The Act defines this tort as: 1.”
Collelo v. Geographic Servs., Inc., 727 S.E.2d 55 (Va. 2012).
· cites it 14× “("GSI") against the defendants, alleging breach of contract, tortious interference with a contract, and violations of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Code §§ 59.1-336 through -343 ("the Trade Secrets Act"); and (2) denied the motion for attorneys' fees made by Anthony…”
Trident Prods. & Servs., LLC v. Canadian Soiless Wholesale, Ltd., 859 F. Supp. 2d 771 (E.D. Va. 2012).
· cites it 9× “Va.Code § 59.1-336. In order to establish that certain information has been the subject of a trade-secret violation, a plaintiff must prove two statutory elements: (1) the existence of a “trade secret”; and (2) the “misappropriation” of that trade secret by the defendant.”
Newport News Indus. v. Dynamic Testing, Inc., 130 F. Supp. 2d 745 (E.D. Va. 2001).
· cites it 9× “The Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings filed by the Defendants is ripe for decision on the issue whether the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“VUT-SA”), Va.Code § 59.1-336 et seq. precludes respondeat superior liability.”
Informatics Applications Grp., Inc. v. Shkolnikov, 836 F. Supp. 2d 400 (E.D. Va. 2011).
· cites it 8× “Failure to State a Claim TIAG’s misappropriation claim arises under the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (the “VUTSA”) pursuant to Va.Code § 59.1-336, et seq. To establish a claim under the VUTSA, a plaintiff must prove that (1) the information in question constitutes a trade…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-336(2)(b)(2) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-336(4) — 1 case
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.