Â鶹ֱ²¥

Companies and employees have clearer guideposts on the rules for departing employees as a result of Â鶹ֱ²¥ & Lardner LLP’s landmark appellate victory in Coe v. DNOW LP, a closely watched Texas trade secret dispute that has helped shape the interpretation of the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (TUTSA). The Texas Supreme Court denied rehearing on July 17, 2026, after previously denying DNOW’s petition for review, leaving in place the Fourteenth Court of Appeals’ precedential decision in favor of Â鶹ֱ²¥’s clients.

Key Takeaways from the Coe v. DNOW Decision

• Conspiracy claims based on trade secret misappropriation are preempted by TUTSA.
• Damages attributable to trade secret misappropriation but be specifically tied to the misappropriation of each trade secret.
• Employees have more guidance of acceptable conduct prior to departure.
• Trial courts have new jury instructions for use in fiduciary duty, TUTSA, and Texas Theft Liability cases.

The decision builds on Â鶹ֱ²¥’s June 2025 appellate victory in Coe v. DNOW LP, 718 S.W.3d 338 (Tex. App. 2025) (pet. denied), in which the court awarded Â鶹ֱ²¥’s clients more than $2.5 million in attorneys’ fees and costs and resolved several issues of first impression under TUTSA. The court held that TUTSA preempts conspiracy and other claims based on the same alleged trade secret misappropriation conduct, expanded the statute’s preemptive reach to additional causes of action, and adopted the defendants’ proposed jury instructions for fiduciary duty claims involving departing managers. The court also ruled that prevailing parties are entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs under the Texas Theft Liability Act, even when the victory is based on TUTSA preemption.

By declining further review, the Texas Supreme Court leaves intact an opinion that will continue to guide litigants and courts navigating trade secret, fiduciary duty, and damages issues in Texas. The ruling marks the culmination of years of successful advocacy by Â鶹ֱ²¥’s trial and appellate teams on behalf of the former employees and related defendants.

Â鶹ֱ²¥â€™s trial team included Rachel Powitzky Steely, Jessica Glatzer Mason, Katherine Harrington, Taylor Appling, and Gaylyn Kinsley. Geoffrey Bracken served as Â鶹ֱ²¥â€™s attorneys’ fees expert at trial. John Kim, Denise Kim, and Mark Levine represented other defendants in the litigation.

Â鶹ֱ²¥â€™s appellate team included Stacy Obenhaus, Taylor Appling, Jessica Glatzer Mason, and Rachel Powitzky Steely.

For additional insights on protecting confidential information, managing workforce mobility risks, and navigating the evolving trade secret landscape, register for Â鶹ֱ²¥’s September 9 webinar: .