Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.108
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.020 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Actual or threatened misappropriation may be 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.
(2) If the court determines that it would be unreasonable to prohibit future use, an injunction may condition future use upon payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time the use could have been prohibited.
(3) In appropriate circumstances, affirmative acts to protect a trade secret may be compelled by court order.
[ 1981 c 286 s 2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Lyft, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 418 P.3d 102 (Wash. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lyft, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 418 P.3d 102 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 4× “(B) acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use, or (C) derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use.”
Doe v. Washington State Patrol, 374 P.3d 63 (Wash. 2016). · cites it 2× “at 262 ; RCW 19.108.020(3). Additionally, PAWS II cited to legislative history in which the legislature declared “ ‘it a matter of public policy that the confidentiality of such information be protected and its unnecessaiy disclosure be prevented.”
Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 738 P.2d 665 (Wash. 2000). · cites it 3× “Injunction RCW 19.108.020(1) provides in part that "[a]ctual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined.”
Progressive Animal Welfare Soc'y v. Univ. of Washington, 884 P.2d 592 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 2× “RCW 19.108.020(1). Given the potential for unfunded biomedical grant proposals to eventuate in trade secrets as broadly defined by the statute, this "other statute” operates as an independent limit on disclosure of portions of the records at issue here that have even potential…”
Seiu Healthcare Nw Training P'ship v. Evergreen Freedom Found., 427 P.3d 688 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “" RCW 19.108.020, .030. The act "displaces conflicting tort, restitutionary, and other law of this state pertaining to civil liability for misappropriation of a trade secret.”
Pac. Aerospace & Elec., Inc. v. Taylor, 295 F. Supp. 2d 1188 (E.D. Wash. 2003). “Improper means “includes theft, ... breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic means.”
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. City of Seattle, 89 P.3d 295 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “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…”
Belo Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Click! Network, 343 P.3d 370 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “2d at 262 (citing RCW 19.108.020(3), .050). ¶13 The UTSA defines a trade secret as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that: (a) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally…”
ACLU of Washington v. City of Seattle, 89 P.3d 295 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “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…”
Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 716 P.2d 956 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “As I view the record before us, Boeing's request for injunctive relief under RCW 19.108.020(1) and the court's general equity powers, was incidental to the primary action against Sierracin for wrongfully using Boeing's trade secrets.”
John Doe A v. Wash. State Patrol (Wash. 2016). · cites it 2× “at 262; RCW 19.108.020(3). Additionally, PAWS II cited to legislative history in which the legislature declared "it a matter of public policy that the confidentiality of such information be protected and its unnecessary disclosure be prevented.”
Kassa Ins. Servs. v. Ryan Pugh, et ux (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “He argues Kassa should have attempted to prevent the solicitation of its clients by seeking an injunction under RCW 19.108.020 or at least by protesting.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.020(1) — 8 cases
Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 738 P.2d 665 (Wash. 2000). “Injunction RCW 19.108.020(1) provides in part that "[a]ctual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined.”
Lyft, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 418 P.3d 102 (Wash. 2018). “(B) acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use, or (C) derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use.”
Progressive Animal Welfare Soc'y v. Univ. of Washington, 884 P.2d 592 (Wash. 1994). “RCW 19.108.020(1). Given the potential for unfunded biomedical grant proposals to eventuate in trade secrets as broadly defined by the statute, this "other statute” operates as an independent limit on disclosure of portions of the records at issue here that have even potential…”
Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 716 P.2d 956 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “As I view the record before us, Boeing's request for injunctive relief under RCW 19.108.020(1) and the court's general equity powers, was incidental to the primary action against Sierracin for wrongfully using Boeing's trade secrets.”
Allyis, Inc., App. v. Simplicity Consulting, Inc., Res. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.020(3) — 6 cases
Doe v. Washington State Patrol, 374 P.3d 63 (Wash. 2016). “at 262 ; RCW 19.108.020(3). Additionally, PAWS II cited to legislative history in which the legislature declared “ ‘it a matter of public policy that the confidentiality of such information be protected and its unnecessaiy disclosure be prevented.”
Progressive Animal Welfare Soc'y v. Univ. of Washington, 884 P.2d 592 (Wash. 1994). “RCW 19.108.020(1). Given the potential for unfunded biomedical grant proposals to eventuate in trade secrets as broadly defined by the statute, this "other statute” operates as an independent limit on disclosure of portions of the records at issue here that have even potential…”
Belo Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Click! Network, 343 P.3d 370 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “2d at 262 (citing RCW 19.108.020(3), .050). ¶13 The UTSA defines a trade secret as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that: (a) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally…”
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. City of Seattle, 89 P.3d 295 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “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…”
ACLU of Washington v. City of Seattle, 89 P.3d 295 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “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…”
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.