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

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.040 (2026)

Award of attorney's fees

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
If a claim of misappropriation is made in bad faith, a motion to terminate an injunction is made or resisted in bad faith, or wilful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party.
[ 1981 c 286 s 4.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2000–2026 · leading case: Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 738 P.2d 665 (Wash. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 738 P.2d 665 (Wash. 2000). · cites it 2× “030(2), and awarded exemplary damages which doubled Boeing's award. The trial court also doubled Sierracin's antitrust damages against Boeing.”
Ada Motors, Inc., Dba Burien Toyota, Res. v. David L. Butler, App., 432 P.3d 445 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “" Regarding maliciousness under the UTSA, Larson proposed a detailed definition: "Malicious" is defined as being characterized by, or involving, malice; having, or done with, wicked, evil or mischievous intentions or 18 RCW 19.108.040. 195 RCW 19.108.010. 20 CP at 2199.”
Thola v. Henschell, 164 P.3d 524 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “On retrial, if the jury finds that Henschell ratified Mahan's conduct, the UTSA gives the trial court authority to exercise its discretion and award attorney fees and exemplary damages in an amount double the damages proved to have resulted from Mahan's malicious and willful…”
Thola v. Henschell, 140 Wash. App. 70 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “On retrial, if the jury finds that Henschell ratified Mahan’s conduct, the UTSA gives the trial court authority to exercise its discretion and award attorney fees and exemplary damages in an amount double the damages proved to have resulted from Mahan’s malicious and willful…”
Eagle Grp., Inc. v. Pullen, 58 P.3d 292 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “Accordingly, the trial court did not clearly err in awarding attorney fees and exemplary damages to Eagle *424 under the UTSA, RCW 19.108.030(2), .040 based on RAS’ willful and, by implication, malicious actions.”
Eagle Grp., Inc. v. Pullen, 58 P.3d 292 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “Accordingly, the trial court did not clearly err in awarding attorney fees and exemplary damages to Eagle under the UTSA, RCW 19.”
Precision Airmotive Corp. v. Rivera, 288 F. Supp. 2d 1151 (W.D. Wash. 2003). “Attorneys’ fees Defendants request their attorneys’ fees under RCW 19.108.040, which pro *1155 vides that “[i]f a claim of misappropriation is made in bad faith .”
Staff Builders Home Healthcare, Inc. v. Whitlock, 33 P.3d 424 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “RCW 19.108.040. The trial court found, as a matter of law, that Whitlock’s actions were “willful and malicious.”
vPersonalize Inc v. Magnetize Consultants Ltd (W.D. Wash. 2020). · cites it 6× “§ 1927 ; (3) RCW § 19.108.040; and (4) RCW § 4.84.185.”
Lakoda, Inc. v. Omh Proscreen Usa, Inc. (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “" RCW 19.108.040. The special verdict form asked jurors whether OMH's or Mr.”
Bensussen Deutsch & Associations LLC v. Mollins (W.D. Wash. 2020). · cites it 2× “Attorney fees and costs are sought 19 “pursuant to RCW 19.108.040, the Employment Agreements between Defendant Mollins and 20 BDA, RCW 4.”
Yanjun Wu, Et Ano, App/cross-res V. Aptly Tech. Corp., Res/cross-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “” RCW 19.108.040. Neither the UTSA nor any Washington appellate court defines the phrase “bad faith” as it applies to UTSA claims.”
Show all 22 citing cases →
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.