Office of Attorney General v. Nationwide Pools Inc.
he Office of Attorney General v. Nationwide Pool Inc. case, reviewed by the Florida District Court of Appeal, involved legal disputes concerning procedural and evidentiary matters from a prior trial. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida attorney Robyn L. Sztyndor played a critical role in representing her client’s interests, highlighting alleged errors in the lower court's rulings.
The Office of Attorney General v. Nationwide Pool Inc. case, reviewed by the Florida District Court of Appeal, involved legal disputes concerning procedural and evidentiary matters from a prior trial. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida attorney Robyn L. Sztyndor played a critical role in representing her client’s interests, highlighting alleged errors in the lower court's rulings.
The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) filed a lawsuit against Nationwide Pools, Inc., alleging deceptive trade practices and improper credit card surcharges. The OAG sought a court ruling deeming these practices unfair, an injunction banning the defendants from the pool industry, equitable relief, restitution for affected consumers, civil penalties, and reimbursement of attorney's fees.
Once the complaint was filed, the OAG found that the defendants had closed Nationwide Pools and transferred its assets to a new company, National Construction Group. The OAG amended the complaint to include the new entity and sought an ex parte injunction and asset freeze, which the court granted. While the defendants could have challenged the injunction under Florida law, they did not.
The appeal addressed key legal principles, including the admissibility of evidence and the proper application of statutory law. The appellate court's decision underscored the importance of procedural fairness and the accurate interpretation of legal frameworks. For full details, see the case summary on FindLaw: Case Summary.