>He wasn't being paid by Apple while he was working on NeXT though (at least I don't believe).

He resigned on the same day he told them about NeXT, which had already had a good amount of work put into its planning (including poaching several apple engineers). I think it's reasonable to assume that before he resigned, he was being paid.

IIRC, there was a lawsuit which was settled. Check old Infoworld or other traderags.

it's hard to pin any actual evidence that he used company resources to plan/execute the NeXT startup though.

I believe GP alleges not that he was paid by apple at next, but that there was planning for next and recruiting happening before the moment of resignation, whilst still employed at apple, because he announced his plans and successful recruiting efforts to apple at the moment of resignation.

Seems to me to be pretty similar to this case, although, as noted down thread, it will likely hinge on the very specific details of this instance.