Some of the key findings of the State Court analysis, which was published second, include:
- In the vast majority of trade secret cases, the alleged misappropriator was someone the trade secret owner knew. Specifically, the alleged misappropriator was an employee or a business partner 93% of the time in this state study. That figure was comparable to that of the federal study, which showed the alleged misappropriator to be an employee or a business partner in 90% of cases. One key difference between state and federal courts is that while 78% of state cases involved alleged employee misappropriators, only 53% of federal cases did.
- About half of all state appellate cases are heard in only five states: California (16%), Texas (11%), Ohio (10%), New York (6%), and Georgia (6%).
- State appellate courts affirmed trade secret decisions 68% of the time and reversed them 30%.
- Alleged misappropriators won more often than trade secret owners on appeal, winning 57% of the time and losing 41%. Alleged misappropriators also have an advantage on appeal in terms of affirmance/reversal rates. Appellate courts reverse lower court decisions in favor of trade secret owners more often (58%) than they reverse lower court decisions in favor of alleged misappropriators (42%).