The Shark Coast Tactical lawsuit is a civil tort action the Sarasota, Florida firearms retailer filed on November 25, 2025 in Clark County Superior Court in Indiana against Orion Arms Corp (doing business as Orion Wholesale), Taylor Customs LLC, and two individual defendants, Colby Politzki and Alec Neff. The case is captioned Shark Coast Tactical, LLC v. Neff, Alec, et al., case number 10C06-2511-CT-000175, and is docketed as a General Torts matter.1Trellis Law. Shark Coast Tactical, LLC v. Orion Arms Corp d/b/a Orion Wholesale, Taylor Customs LLC, Colby Politzki et al. The full complaint has not been made publicly available, and the specific counts have not been reported in depth.
Who Is Suing Whom
Shark Coast Tactical, LLC was founded in 2011 and operates from 2819 Bee Ridge Road in Sarasota. It sells firearms, accessories, body armor, and night vision equipment, offers in-house gunsmithing, and handles items regulated under the National Firearms Act. Will Meade is the primary owner and CEO, and Robert Fox is listed as a co-founder.2Shark Coast Tactical. About Shark Coast Tactical
Orion Arms Corp operates as Orion Wholesale out of 3013 Utica Sellersburg Road in Jeffersonville, Indiana, distributing firearms to federally licensed dealers.3WAVE 3 News. New Weapons Distribution Facility Opening in Jeffersonville Its Type 01 Federal Firearms License expired on January 1, 2025.4FFLs.com. Orion Arms Corp FFL Record Brent Taylor is identified as one of Orion’s owners. Taylor Customs LLC is also named, though publicly available detail about that entity is limited. Summonses for all four defendants were issued on the day the case was filed.1Trellis Law. Shark Coast Tactical, LLC v. Orion Arms Corp d/b/a Orion Wholesale, Taylor Customs LLC, Colby Politzki et al.
What the Claims Appear to Involve
The docket classifies the filing as a General Torts civil action and identifies Shark Coast Tactical as a Florida-based designer, manufacturer, and seller of custom firearms. Beyond that, the specific causes of action are not laid out in the publicly available docket entries.
The shape of the case, pairing a former employer against a competing firearms company and two individual defendants, is consistent with disputes over former employees, trade secrets, restrictive covenants, or unfair competition. That is an inference from the caption and the parties, not a statement from the complaint itself. As of the filing, the case was in its earliest stages.
How Florida Noncompete Law Could Apply
If restrictive covenants against former employees are part of the claims, the governing statute would likely be Florida Statute § 542.335. Under that law, a noncompete or confidentiality agreement is enforceable if it is in a signed writing and the employer shows a legitimate business interest, such as trade secrets, confidential information, or substantial customer relationships.5Florida Legislature. Fla. Stat. § 542.335 – Valid Restraints of Trade or Commerce
For employees and independent contractors, restrictions up to six months are presumed reasonable, and anything over two years is presumed unreasonable. When a court finds a covenant overbroad, the statute directs the judge to modify it rather than void it, and to construe it in favor of protecting the employer’s legitimate interests. Courts are also barred from weighing the personal economic hardship of the person being restrained.5Florida Legislature. Fla. Stat. § 542.335 – Valid Restraints of Trade or Commerce
Florida’s CHOICE Act, which took effect on July 4, 2025, tilted the framework further toward employers for higher-earning workers by creating a presumption of enforceability and requiring preliminary injunctions in qualifying cases. Whether it would reach this dispute depends on when any agreements were signed and whether the individual defendants meet the earnings threshold. The case was filed in Indiana, so choice-of-law questions may also come into play.
Shark Coast Tactical’s ATF History
Readers looking into the plaintiff will find a separate regulatory record. An ATF inspection conducted between 2015 and 2017 found seven violations of federal firearms regulations at Shark Coast Tactical. Findings included recordkeeping failures involving Forms 4473 and NICS background check responses, along with a determination that the company had acted as a “straw” applicant for another entity, Brandon Tactical, LLC, making false statements on the ATF Form 7 to obtain a federal firearms license.6The Trace. Shark Coast Tactical Inspection Report
Several violations were repeats from a 2014 inspection, including failures to report multiple handgun sales and to keep required acquisition and disposition records. Investigators recommended revocation, but the ATF’s Director of Industry Operations settled the matter, and a warning letter was sent on May 22, 2017.6The Trace. Shark Coast Tactical Inspection Report The company’s pawnbroker firearms license carried an expiration date of February 1, 2023 in ATF records. That regulatory history is separate from the Indiana lawsuit and does not indicate any connection between the two.