Cordoba Legal Group Sued Over IRS Debt Robocalls

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 on February 26, 2026 in the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division. These are accusations only; no factual determination 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 that term is defined in 47 USC § 153(39).
2. At no time did Plaintiff seek or inquire about Defendant’s goods and services prior to receiving the telemarketing calls in question.
3. Ms. Harris’ phone number, 205-XXX-1539, is a residential phone line.
4. It is not associated with any business and is used by Ms. Harris for personal purposes.
5. The telephone number has been in the National Do Not Call Register 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 15.
8. Each of the calls used a pre-recorded or artificial voice message.
9. During the conversations, the plaintiff heard a pre-recorded message that essentially said the following: “Can you share with us how much you owe the IRS? Five thousand, eight thousand, or ten thousand or more?”
10. The pre-recorded message further instructed Plaintiff to remain on the line to be connected to a live agent.
11. The purpose of the calls was to advertise and promote Defendant’s services related to tax or IRS debt relief.
12. Indeed, after the November 17, 2025 pre-record, the plaintiff received an email with custody papers from Javier Lara, an employee of the defendant.
13. The email was sent from support@cordobalegal.com, a domain belonging to the defendant.
14. The plaintiff did not give the defendant express permission in advance to place telemarketing calls to her telephone number.
15. The plaintiff did not have an established business relationship with the defendant prior to receiving the calls.
16. The plaintiff was not interested in the defendant’s services and had no contact with the defendant.
17. The plaintiff and the other recipients of the calls have suffered damage as a result of these calls. They were temporarily denied legitimate use of their phones because their phone lines were tied up during the telemarketing calls and their privacy was inappropriately invaded.
18. The calls were frustrating, unpleasant, annoying, bothersome and disruptive to the solitude of the plaintiff and the members of the class.

Class Action Allegations

The complaint proposes two national classes:

National Do Not Call Registry Class: All persons in the United States whose (1) telephone numbers have been on the National Do Not Call Register for at least 31 days, (2) but who have received more than one telemarketing call from or on behalf of Defendant (3) within a twelve-month period, (4) beginning 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 lawsuit until the class is certified (2) received one or more calls on their cell phone (3) from or on behalf of Defendant, (4) sent using the same, or substantially similar, pre-recorded message that was used to contact Plaintiff.

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

Claims for relief

First Cause of Action – National Do Not Call Registry Class (TCPA) Violations: 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 USC § 227(c)(5). The complaint alleges that the violations were negligent, intentional or knowing.

Second Cause of Action — TCPA Violations (Pre-record Class): The complaint alleges that Defendant violated the TCPA by sending prerecorded calls to the cell phones of Plaintiff and members of the Pre-Record Class without their prior express written consent, in violation of 47 USC § 227 et seq.

Remedies sought

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

• Certification of the proposed class
• A statement that defendant’s actions violate the TCPA
• An interim injunction prohibiting the defendant from calling a residential number included in the National Do Not Call Register in the future, except for emergencies
• An award of between $500 and $1,500 in damages for each call made, as permitted by law under 47 USC § 227(c)(5)
• $500 in statutory damages per violation for Pre-Record Class members under 47 USC § 227(b)(3)(B)
• Triple damages if it is determined that violations were committed knowingly or intentionally
• A preliminary injunction banning the use of pre-recorded voice in the future, except for emergencies

Frequently asked questions

Has Cordoba Legal Group been found liable in this case?

No. This is a complaint: a legal file containing allegations made by the plaintiff. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC has not been found liable for any misconduct in this proceeding. Courts require evidence before passing judgment against a party.

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

Under 47 USC § 227(c)(5), an individual who has received more than one telephone solicitation within a twelve-month period by or on behalf of the same entity, and whose number was on the National Do Not Call Registry, may file a private lawsuit seeking $500 per violation. If the violations were intentional or knowing, damages may be tripled to $1,500 per violation. The register has been set up so that persons who do not wish to receive telephone requests can register their telephone numbers to express their wish.

What are the TCPA’s restrictions on prerecorded voice calls?

Under 47 USC § 227(b)(1)(A), it is unlawful to make a call to a cellular telephone using an artificial or prerecorded voice 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 intentional violations.

Who falls under the proposed class in this case?

The complaint proposes two classes. The National Do Not Call Registry Class includes all individuals in the United States whose numbers have been on the registry for at least 31 days and who have received more than one telemarketing call from or on behalf of Cordoba Legal Group within a twelve-month period going back four years from the filing of the complaint. The Pre-Record Class includes all persons in the United States who, within four years prior to the commencement of the lawsuit, received one or more calls on their cell phone from or on behalf of Cordoba Legal Group containing the same or a substantially similar pre-recorded message.

Source: CourtListener — Harris v. Cordoba Legal Group PLLC, Docket 72336772. The information on this page comes from the court complaint filed on February 26, 2026. These are allegations; no factual determination has been made.