Stone Castle Financial, Inc. v. Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that alternate claims, not based on information determined to be a trade secret, could proceed
• concluding that alternate claims, not based on information determined to be a trade secret, could proceed
• concluding that, “unless it can be clearly discerned that the information in question constitutes a trade secret, the Court cannot dismiss alternative theories of relief as preempted by the VUTSA”
• noting that “where courts have found preemption on a motion to dismiss, they repeatedly establish that the information in issue—as alleged—constitutes trade secrets before reaching the preemption question”
• explaining that “unless it can be clearly discerned that the information in question constitutes a trade secret, the Court cannot dismiss alternative theories of relief as preempted by the VUTSA”
• “Indeed, we do not agree that the [Uniform Trade Secrets Act] provides a blanket preemption to all claims that arise from a factual circumstance possibly involving a trade secret.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).