TCPA class action lawsuits overview:
- Who: Two consumers filed separate class action lawsuits against AT&T Services Inc.
- Why: The plaintiffs claimed AT&T kept sending them marketing text messages after they asked the company to stop.
- Where: The AT&T class action lawsuits were filed in Florida and California federal courts.
- How to get help: If you received unwanted marketing calls or prerecorded messages, you may be able to join a TCPA robocall lawsuit.
Two new class action lawsuits accuse AT&T of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by continuing to send marketing text messages to consumers who asked the company to stop.
Plaintiffs Bridget Botto and Rebecca Griffin filed the separate, nationwide TCPA complaints on Aug. 26 and Sept. 28, respectively.
Griffin, a Florida resident, claims she replied to an AT&T promotional text on March 19, 2026, asking the company to stop sending her messages. Botto, a California resident, claims she sent a similar request on or about March 11, 2026.
Screenshots in both complaints show an automated reply stating that AT&T did not understand the response, and each plaintiff alleges the company sent at least two more solicitations after her opt-out request.
“[AT&T] continued to text message the plaintiff and class members to harass them into making purchases,” Griffin’s AT&T lawsuit claims.
The plaintiffs argue AT&T’s alleged failure to honor their requests shows the company has no written do-not-call policy, does not maintain a do-not-call list and does not train its telemarketing personnel.
Both claim the texts caused inconvenience, invasion of privacy, aggravation and annoyance. Botto’s AT&T lawsuit further alleges the company sent multiple telemarketing texts before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. local time.
Both plaintiffs want to represent nationwide classes of consumers who received more than one AT&T marketing text within any 12-month period on a cellphone number used as a residential line, either after asking the company to stop or, in Botto’s case, with at least one text sent before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m.
State Farm, CVS face similar TCPA class action lawsuits
In addition to the AT&T lawsuits, three more class action lawsuits make similar TCPA claims against State Farm and CVS Pharmacy.
Plaintiff Cesar Josue Ramos, a California resident, claims State Farm ignored an opt-out request sent on or about Feb. 7, 2026, and kept sending marketing texts, including on June 4 and Aug. 3.
In another alleged TCPA violation, plaintiff Maureen O’Brien claims CVS confirmed a “STOP” request she sent, but the company sent another ExtraCare promotional text about 70 days later.
Meanwhile, plaintiff Karoly Bieganowski claims CVS sent her at least 19 marketing texts and rejected two plain language opt-out requests because she did not use the keyword “STOP.” Both plaintiffs filed their complaints in California federal court.
All five complaints allege violations of the TCPA and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule requiring companies to maintain internal do-not-call procedures. Botto’s AT&T lawsuit also cites the FCC rule restricting after-hours solicitations. Bieganowski further alleges CVS violated California’s Unfair Competition Law.
The plaintiffs request statutory damages of $500 per violation and up to $1,500 for each knowing or willful violation, along with injunctive relief. All five TCPA class action lawsuits demand a jury trial.
Have you received any unsolicited text messages after opting out or sending a “Stop” command? Let us know in the comments.
Griffin, Botto and O’Brien are represented by Joseph Varona and Vinit R. Venkatesh of PLG Damage Attorneys. Ramos is represented by Gerald D. Lane Jr. of The Law Offices of Jibrael S. Hindi. Bieganowski is represented by Liran Aliav of Consumer Lit Inc.
The TCPA class action lawsuits are Griffin v. AT&T Services Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-14385, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida; Botto v. AT&T Services Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-09527, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California; Ramos v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Case No. 2:26-cv-09602, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California; O’Brien v. CVS Pharmacy Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-03352, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California; and Bieganowski v. CVS Pharmacy Inc., Case No. 5:26-cv-05771, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
