Opinion ID: 1197055
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the Trade Secret found by the trial court was impermissibly vague.

Text: C. Whether the Trade Secret found by the trial court wrongfully impinged upon Shatila's right to use in future employment the education, skill and knowledge acquired during his employment with Basic. D. Whether the trial court's ruling that the Trade Secret had been misappropriated by IFP and Shatila is contrary to the trial court's findings of fact. E. Whether the trial court erred in finding that Basic had established any actual loss under Idaho Code § 48-803. F. Whether IFP and Shatila are entitled to attorney fees on appeal and in the trial court. The respondent also raises the following issue on cross-appeal: G. Whether the trial court erred by employing a net profit measure to calculate the amount of the unjust enrichment award.