Harris v. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC, Case No. 2:26-cv-00332

Primary Source: View Original Complaint (PDF) — Harris v. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC, Case No. 2:26-cv-00332-JHE

Facts as Alleged in the Complaint

The following facts are taken directly from the complaint filed by Tiffany Harris against Cordoba Legal Group PLLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division, on February 26, 2026. These are allegations only; no finding of fact has been made.

The Parties

1. Plaintiff Tiffany Harris is an individual citizen in this District.
2. Defendant Cordoba Legal Group PLLC is a Florida professional limited liability company.

Factual Allegations

1. Defendant is a “person” as the term is defined by 47 U.S.C. § 153(39).
2. At no point has the Plaintiff sought out or solicited information regarding Defendant’s goods and services prior to receiving the telemarketing calls at issue.
3. Ms. Harris’ telephone number, 205-XXX-1539, is a residential telephone line.
4. It is not associated with a business and is used by Ms. Harris for personal purposes.
5. The telephone number has been on the National Do Not Call Registry since August 28, 2024.
6. Plaintiff received at least three telemarketing calls from Defendant Cordoba Legal Group PLLC.
7. Plaintiff received telemarketing calls on November 14 and November 15.
8. Each of the calls utilized a prerecorded or artificial voice message.
9. During the calls, Plaintiff heard a prerecorded message stating, in substance: “Can you share with us how much you owe to the IRS? Five thousand, eight thousand, or ten thousand or more?”
10. The prerecorded message further instructed Plaintiff to remain on the line to be transferred to a live agent.
11. The purpose of the calls was to advertise and market Defendant’s services related to tax or IRS debt relief.
12. Indeed, following the November 17, 2025 pre-record, the Plaintiff got an e-mail with retention papers from Javier Lara, an employee of the Defendant.
13. The e-mail was sent from support@cordobalegal.com, a domain of the Defendant.
14. Plaintiff did not provide Defendant with prior express consent to place telemarketing calls to her telephone number.
15. Plaintiff did not have an established business relationship with Defendant at any time prior to receiving the calls.
16. Plaintiff was not interested in Defendant’s services and did not engage with Defendant.
17. Plaintiff and the other call recipients were harmed by these calls. They were temporarily deprived of the legitimate use of their telephones because their phone lines were tied up during the telemarketing calls, and their privacy was improperly invaded.
18. The calls were frustrating, obnoxious, annoying, constituted a nuisance, and disturbed the solitude of Plaintiff and members of the class.

Class Action Allegations

The complaint proposes two nationwide classes:

National Do Not Call Registry Class: All persons in the United States whose (1) telephone numbers were on the National Do Not Call Registry for at least 31 days, (2) but who received more than one telemarketing call from or on behalf of Defendant (3) within a 12-month period, (4) from four years prior to the filing of the Complaint.

Pre-Record Class: All persons in the United States who, (1) within four years prior to the commencement of this litigation until the class is certified (2) received one or more calls on their cellular telephone (3) from or on behalf of Defendant, (4) sent using the same, or substantially similar, pre-recorded message used to contact the Plaintiff.

The complaint alleges that common questions of law and fact include: (a) whether Defendant systematically made multiple telephone calls to members of the National Do Not Call Registry Class; (b) whether Defendant made calls to Plaintiff and members of the Class without first obtaining prior express written consent; (c) whether Defendant’s conduct constitutes a violation of the TCPA; and (d) whether members of the Class are entitled to treble damages based on the willfulness of Defendant’s conduct.

Claims for Relief

First Cause of Action — TCPA Violations (National Do Not Call Registry Class): The complaint alleges that Defendant made telemarketing calls to Plaintiff and the class despite their numbers being on the National Do Not Call Registry, in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5). The complaint alleges the violations were negligent, willful, or knowing.

Second Cause of Action — TCPA Violations (Pre-Record Class): The complaint alleges that Defendant violated the TCPA by sending pre-recorded calls to cellular telephones of Plaintiff and members of the Pre-Record Class without their prior express written consent, in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.

Remedies Sought

The complaint requests the following relief on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class:

• Certification of the proposed Class
• A declaration that Defendant’s actions violate the TCPA
• Injunctive relief prohibiting Defendant from making calls to any residential number listed on the National Do Not Call Registry in the future, except for emergency purposes
• An award of between $500 and $1,500 in damages for each and every call made, as allowed by law under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5)
• $500 in statutory damages per violation for Pre-Record Class members under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B)
• Treble damages if violations are found to have been knowing or willful
• Injunctive relief prohibiting use of pre-recorded voice in the future, except for emergency purposes

Frequently Asked Questions

Has Cordoba Legal Group been found liable in this case?

No. This is a complaint — a legal filing containing allegations made by the plaintiff. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC has not been found liable for any wrongdoing in this proceeding. Courts require evidence and proof before entering a judgment against any party.

What does the TCPA say about calling numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry?

Under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5), a person who has received more than one telephone solicitation within a 12-month period by or on behalf of the same entity, and whose number was on the National Do Not Call Registry, may bring a private lawsuit seeking $500 per violation. If the violations were willful or knowing, damages may be trebled to $1,500 per violation. The Registry was established so that individuals who wish not to receive telephone solicitations can register their telephone numbers to indicate that desire.

What is the TCPA’s restriction on prerecorded voice calls?

Under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A), it is unlawful to make any call using an artificial or prerecorded voice to a cellular telephone without the prior express consent of the called party. For telemarketing calls, the FCC requires prior express written consent. Violations carry statutory damages of $500 per call for negligent violations and up to $1,500 per call for knowing or willful violations.

Who is included in the proposed class in this case?

The complaint proposes two classes. The National Do Not Call Registry Class covers all persons in the United States whose numbers were on the Registry for at least 31 days and who received more than one telemarketing call from or on behalf of Cordoba Legal Group within a 12-month period, going back four years from the complaint’s filing. The Pre-Record Class covers all persons in the United States who received one or more calls on their cellular telephone from or on behalf of Cordoba Legal Group using the same or substantially similar prerecorded message, within four years prior to the commencement of litigation.

Source: CourtListener — Harris v. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC, Docket 72336772. Information on this page is taken from the court complaint filed February 26, 2026. These are allegations; no finding of fact has been made.