§ 134A.008.Uniformity of Application and Construction

One sentence with real consequences for how these cases are argued.

This chapter shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.

The direction makes out-of-state authority persuasive in a way it ordinarily is not. A Texas court reading this chapter is instructed to reach the same answer other uniform-act states have reached, so decisions from those states are relevant material rather than foreign curiosities.

That matters most where Texas has little authority of its own. The chapter dates from 2013, and questions the Texas courts have not addressed are commonly answered elsewhere.

The uniform act has been adopted in the great majority of states, which makes the body of comparative authority substantial.

Federal law adds a further layer. The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 created a federal civil claim on closely parallel definitions, and the 2017 amendments to this chapter aligned several definitions with it — so federal decisions bear on the same language.

The direction has limits. Uniformity is the general purpose, not an override: where Texas has departed from the uniform text, the Texas text governs, and this section cannot import a rule the Legislature declined to enact.

The sealing procedure is the clearest example of such a departure — it has no counterpart in the uniform act and answers a question of Texas practice.