Violations of Illinois Trade Secret Act--Confidential Business Information

The other day I had a very surprising and amazing situation where not one, but TWO licensed Illinois attorneys admitted to me, in front of a hearing officer, that they were in receipt of an employee manual which was clearly marked "confidential" on its cover.

Further, she admitted she induced the breach via an ex-employee--most likely another attorney.

So I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that there IS an Illinois Trade Secret Act, and that it covers:

Sec. 2. As used in this Act, unless the context requires otherwise:
(a) "Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a confidential relationship or other duty to maintain secrecy or limit use, or espionage through electronic or other means. Reverse engineering or independent development shall not be considered improper means.
(b) "Misappropriation" means:
(1) acquisition of a trade secret of a person by another 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 a person without express or implied consent by another 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 knowledge of the trade secret was:
(I) derived from or through a person who utilized improper means to acquire it;
(II) acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or
(III) derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or
(C) before a material change of position, knew or had reason to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by accident or mistake.
(c) "Person" means a natural person, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision or agency, or any other for‑profit or not‑for‑profit legal entity.
(d) "Trade secret" means information, including but not limited to, technical or non‑technical data, a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, drawing, process, financial data, or list of actual or potential customers or suppliers, that:
(1) is sufficiently secret to derive economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to 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 or confidentiality.
(Source: P.A. 85‑366.)

Clearly what happened was a violation of the act. The document is marked. It is kept on a secure, encrypted server in an office locked with a finger print lock.

Damages are as follows:

(765 ILCS 1065/4) (from Ch. 140, par. 354)
Sec. 4. (a) In addition to the relief provided for by Section 3, a person is entitled to recover damages for misappropriation. Damages can include both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss. If neither damages nor unjust enrichment caused by the misappropriation are proved by a preponderance of the evidence, the court may award damages caused by misappropriation measured in terms of a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator's unauthorized disclosure or use of a trade secret.
(b) If willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a).
(Source: P.A. 85‑366.)

It is my belief that all parties involved acted in an knowing manner.

The manual contains business methods and means to protect and manage the business. Other law firms do not need to see what works for that business.

Oh and in case anyone thinks that violating confidentiality of documents is no big deal and all you get is a slap on the wrist, I was was working on a case where one of the attorneys in the firm (about 15 years ago) inadvertently showed an expert witness confidential documents without having him first sign a confidentiality agreement under a protective order. The judge awarded $35,000 in damages upon hearing and the law firm and client were BOTH liable.