Va. Code » Title 59.1. Trade and Commerce » Chapter 26. Uniform Trade Secrets Act
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341 (2026)

Effect on other law

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, this chapter displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this Commonwealth providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.

B. This chapter does not affect:

1. Contractual remedies whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret; or

2. Other civil remedies that are not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret; or

3. Criminal remedies, whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret.

1986, c. 210.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: Ulloa v. Qsp, Inc., 624 S.E.2d 43 (Va. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ulloa v. Qsp, Inc., 624 S.E.2d 43 (Va. 2006). · cites it 6× “The error of the majority's conclusion is evident by its failure to cite, much less adhere to, the provision of Code § 59.1-341, which states in part: B.”
Microstrategy, Inc. v. Bus. Objects, s.a., 429 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 4× “Va.Code § 59.1-341 (emphasis added). The question before this court is simply whether or not the district court properly concluded that “other law” includes statutory causes of action.”
Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Areva NP, Inc., 788 S.E.2d 237 (Va. 2016). · cites it 2× “" Code § 59.1-341(A). The District of Columbia and at least 46 states, including Virginia, have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("UTSA").”
Newport News Indus. v. Dynamic Testing, Inc., 130 F. Supp. 2d 745 (E.D. Va. 2001). · cites it 6× “” The Defendants urge that the failure of the VUTSA explicitly to provide for re-spondeat superior liability in defining misappropriation, when considered in perspective of the VUTSA preemption provision (Va.Code § 59.1-341) requires the conclusion that the statute precludes the…”
Space Sys./Loral, LLC v. Orbital Atk, Inc., 306 F. Supp. 3d 845 (E.D. Va. 2018). · cites it 3× “Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341 (West 2017). Indeed, "the plain language of the preemption provision indicates that the [VUTSA] was intended to prevent inconsistent theories of relief for the same underlying harm by eliminating alternative theories of common law recovery which are…”
E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Indus., Inc., 688 F. Supp. 2d 443 (E.D. Va. 2009). · cites it 6× “Accordingly, DuPont filed the pending *449 Complaint, which asserts six counts against Kolon: (1) a violation of the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Va.Code § 59.1-341; (2) Conspiracy to Injure Another in Trade, Business or Reputation, Va.”
Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. v. Deep South Barrels LLC, 241 F. Supp. 3d 708 (E.D. Va. 2017). · cites it 4× “1-341(A) ("[T]his chapter displaces conflicting tort, restitution-ary, and other law of this Commonwealth providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”). Defendants’ argument fails because plaintiff's allegations in this claim do not rest on Deep South…”
Darton Envtl., Inc. v. Fjuvo Collections, LLC, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1022 (W.D. Va. 2018). · cites it 3× “" Va. Code § 59.1-341(A). "[T]he plain language of the preemption provision indicates that the [VUTSA] was intended to prevent inconsistent theories of relief for the same underlying harm by eliminating alternative theories of common law recovery which are premised on the…”
DSMC, INC. v. Convera Corp., 479 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 2× “; see also VUTSA, Va.Code § 59.1-341 (stating that the VUTSA “displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this Commonwealth providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”
Stone Castle Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., 191 F. Supp. 2d 652 (E.D. Va. 2002). · cites it 2× “Va.Code Ann. § 59.1-341 (Michie 1998). The single published opinion to address preemption under the VUTSA in the Fourth Circuit instructs that “[t]he plain language of the preemption provision indicates that the [VUTSA] was intended to prevent inconsistent theories of relief for…”
Combined Ins. Co. of Am. v. Wiest, 578 F. Supp. 2d 822 (W.D. Va. 2008). · cites it 3× “Va.Code § 59.1-341 (emphasis added). • While the Supreme Court of Virginia has not interpreted the Trade Secret Act’s preemption provision, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia has emphasized that “[t]he plain language of the preemption provision…”
Smithfield Ham & Prods. Co. v. Portion Pac, Inc., 905 F. Supp. 346 (E.D. Va. 1995). · cites it 2× “Va.Code Ann. § 59.1-341 (Michie 1992). The plain language of the preemption provision indicates that the law was intended to prevent inconsistent theories of relief for the same underlying harm by eliminating alternative theories of common law recovery which are premised on the…”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341(A) — 7 cases
Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Areva NP, Inc., 788 S.E.2d 237 (Va. 2016). “" Code § 59.1-341(A). The District of Columbia and at least 46 states, including Virginia, have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("UTSA").”
Microstrategy, Inc. v. Bus. Objects, s.a., 429 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “Va.Code § 59.1-341 (emphasis added). The question before this court is simply whether or not the district court properly concluded that “other law” includes statutory causes of action.”
Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. v. Deep South Barrels LLC, 241 F. Supp. 3d 708 (E.D. Va. 2017). “1-341(A) ("[T]his chapter displaces conflicting tort, restitution-ary, and other law of this Commonwealth providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”). Defendants’ argument fails because plaintiff's allegations in this claim do not rest on Deep South…”
Darton Envtl., Inc. v. Fjuvo Collections, LLC, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1022 (W.D. Va. 2018). “" Va. Code § 59.1-341(A). "[T]he plain language of the preemption provision indicates that the [VUTSA] was intended to prevent inconsistent theories of relief for the same underlying harm by eliminating alternative theories of common law recovery which are premised on the…”
Babcock & Wilcox v. AREVA (Va. 2016).
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341(B) — 1 case
Microstrategy, Inc. v. Bus. Objects, s.a., 429 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “Va.Code § 59.1-341 (emphasis added). The question before this court is simply whether or not the district court properly concluded that “other law” includes statutory causes of action.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341(B)(1) — 1 case
Ulloa v. Qsp, Inc., 624 S.E.2d 43 (Va. 2006). “The error of the majority's conclusion is evident by its failure to cite, much less adhere to, the provision of Code § 59.1-341, which states in part: B.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-341(B)(3) — 1 case
Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. v. Deep South Barrels LLC, 241 F. Supp. 3d 708 (E.D. Va. 2017). “1-341(A) ("[T]his chapter displaces conflicting tort, restitution-ary, and other law of this Commonwealth providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a trade secret.”). Defendants’ argument fails because plaintiff's allegations in this claim do not rest on Deep South…”
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.