In Gieseke V

In Gieseke v. IDCA, Gieseke formed a company to compete with his old employer and worked with one of the former owners of his old employer in the new company. His former employer moved some of the equipment of the new company and changed its mailing address without permission of Gieseke or his partner. When Gieseke sued his former employer the courts held that the former employer:

A) was not liable in tort as its actions did not go beyond "normal business activities"
B) was not liable as Gieseke was not properly licensedy
C) was liable for criminal intent to misappropriate Gieseke's property
D) was liable for breach of the "presumption of goodwill" in business relations
E) none of the other choices are correct