Cindy Carroll: The TCPA Plaintiff Challenging Sunflora’s CBD Robocall Campaign
Cindy Carroll, also known as Cynthia Carroll, is a Florida consumer who became the named plaintiff in a major TCPA class action lawsuit against Sunflora, Inc., the parent company behind Your CBD Store. Unlike many high-volume professional litigators profiled in TCPA litigation circles, Carroll appears to be a legitimate consumer plaintiff who allegedly received unwanted prerecorded robocalls promoting CBD products and chose to pursue legal action.
Carroll is not a serial filer. She is not accused of manufacturing claims through fake names, deceptive tactics, or prolonged call strategies. Instead, she alleges that Sunflora repeatedly targeted her with prerecorded telemarketing calls without proper consent, violating both the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA).
The lawsuit has attracted significant attention from legal commentators, defense attorneys, and consumer advocates because it raises important questions regarding franchise liability, arbitration clauses, class action waivers, and the growing use of prerecorded marketing calls within the CBD industry.
Who Is Cindy Carroll?
Cindy Carroll, also referred to as Cynthia Carroll in court records, is a Florida resident serving as the proposed class representative in a federal class action against Sunflora, Inc.
Unlike professional TCPA litigators who file dozens of lawsuits across multiple jurisdictions, Carroll appears to have pursued a single major TCPA case based on alleged unwanted robocalls.
Known Information About Cindy Carroll
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Full Name | Cindy Carroll (Cynthia Carroll) |
| Location | Florida |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida |
| Role | Proposed class representative |
| Number of TCPA Cases | One significant case against Sunflora |
| Legal Training | None publicly known |
| Manufactured Claims | No allegations of deceptive conduct |
How Carroll Differs From Serial TCPA Litigators
| Comparison | Cindy Carroll | Serial Litigators |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Cases | One major lawsuit | Often 15 to 60+ lawsuits |
| Filing Pattern | Targeted litigation | High-volume filing |
| Fake Names Used | No | Sometimes yes |
| Manufactured Claims | No | Alleged in some cases |
| Fraud Counterclaims | None | Common in some litigation |
| Judicial Warnings | None known | Multiple examples |
| Criminal History | None known | Some plaintiffs have prior issues |
The distinction is important because Carroll’s case reflects the type of consumer complaint the TCPA was originally designed to address: an ordinary person allegedly receiving unwanted prerecorded telemarketing calls.
The Case: Carroll v. Sunflora, Inc.
In August 2024, Carroll filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Sunflora, Inc., which operates under the Your CBD Store brand.
Case Overview
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Court | U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida |
| Filing Date | August 2024 |
| Plaintiff | Cindy Carroll |
| Defendant | Sunflora, Inc. |
| Main Allegation | Illegal prerecorded telemarketing calls |
| Laws Invoked | TCPA and FTSA |
The Core Allegations
According to the complaint, Carroll allegedly received prerecorded robocalls promoting CBD products and discounts without providing prior express written consent.
Key Allegations in the Complaint
| Allegation | Details |
|---|---|
| No Consent | Carroll alleges she never agreed to receive calls |
| Prerecorded Voice | Calls allegedly used prerecorded messaging |
| Marketing Content | Calls promoted CBD products and offers |
| Franchise Involvement | Calls allegedly tied to franchise marketing efforts |
A major part of Carroll’s litigation strategy focuses on documenting the “mechanical” nature of the calls, emphasizing the immediate playback of prerecorded scripts instead of interaction with a live representative.
The Legal Claims
Carroll’s lawsuit includes claims under both federal and Florida law.
Statutes Invoked
| Statute | Purpose | Potential Damages |
|---|---|---|
| TCPA (47 U.S.C. § 227) | Prohibits prerecorded telemarketing calls without consent | $500 to $1,500 per violation |
| Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA) | Florida state robocall protection law | State-level penalties |
The Treble Damages Strategy
Carroll’s complaint seeks treble damages of up to $1,500 per call by arguing the alleged conduct was willful and intentional. According to the litigation theory, the calls promoted specific storefronts and marketing campaigns that were allegedly under the control or supervision of the defendant.
Why Carroll v. Sunflora Matters
The lawsuit has become important because it raises several major legal issues impacting franchise systems, telemarketing campaigns, and privacy compliance.
1. The Post-Facebook v. Duguid TCPA Landscape
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Facebook v. Duguid, many plaintiffs shifted away from focusing exclusively on autodialer technology and instead concentrated on prerecorded voice content.
Carroll’s case reflects this trend by emphasizing the use of prerecorded messages rather than solely relying on autodialer allegations.
2. Vicarious Liability for Franchise Marketing
One of the central questions in the litigation is whether Sunflora, as the parent company, can be held responsible for marketing practices carried out by franchise locations.
Key Legal Questions
| Legal Question | Carroll’s Position |
|---|---|
| Is Sunflora responsible for franchise calls? | Yes |
| Did Sunflora control marketing? | Allegedly yes |
| Were campaigns coordinated corporately? | Allegedly yes |
The outcome could have significant implications for franchise systems that use centralized marketing strategies.
3. The Opt-Out Controversy
Sunflora’s privacy policies and opt-out mechanisms have also received scrutiny.
Alleged Problems With the Opt-Out Process
| Issue | Description |
|---|---|
| No simple “STOP” option | Consumers allegedly had to email a specific address |
| Friction-filled process | Critics described the system as unnecessarily difficult |
| Consumer burden | Opting out allegedly required extra steps |
Legal analysts noted that cumbersome opt-out systems may create additional compliance concerns under consumer protection laws.
4. Arbitration Clauses and Class Action Waivers
Sunflora’s terms reportedly contain arbitration clauses and class action waivers that could potentially force disputes into private arbitration instead of class litigation.
This remains one of the major battlegrounds in the case.
The Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA)
The FTSA provides Florida consumers with additional protections beyond federal TCPA law.
TCPA vs. FTSA
| Feature | TCPA | FTSA |
|---|---|---|
| Applies to prerecorded calls | Yes | Yes |
| Requires consent | Yes | Yes |
| Private lawsuits allowed | Yes | Yes |
| Statutory damages | Yes | Yes |
The FTSA gives plaintiffs an independent legal basis for pursuing claims even if certain TCPA arguments face obstacles.
The Request for Injunctive Relief
Carroll is not only seeking damages. She is also requesting injunctive relief aimed at stopping the alleged robocall practices.
Relief Requested
| Remedy | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Monetary damages | Compensation for alleged violations |
| Injunctive relief | Stop future robocalls |
| Class certification | Expand recovery to similarly affected consumers |
If class certification is granted, potential exposure could become substantial due to statutory damages on a per-call basis.
Current Status of the Case (2026)
As of 2026, the litigation remains active.
Current Litigation Status
| Status Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Filing Date | August 2024 |
| Current Phase | Active litigation |
| Key Issues | Class certification, arbitration, franchise liability |
| Dismissed Claims | Some portions reportedly dismissed |
| Remaining Claims | Core TCPA and FTSA claims remain active |
The central issue involving alleged prerecorded robocalls without consent continues to move through the court system.
How Carroll Compares to Other TCPA Plaintiffs
| Comparison | Cindy Carroll | Serial Litigators |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Cases | One | Often dozens |
| Fake Names | No | Sometimes |
| Fraud Counterclaims | None | Common in some cases |
| Criminal History | None known | Occasionally present |
| Judicial Warnings | None | Multiple examples |
| Litigation Pattern | Consumer-focused | High-volume filing |
What makes Carroll different is that she appears to fit the classic consumer-protection model envisioned by the TCPA.
What Businesses Should Learn From This Case
The lawsuit serves as a warning to companies using prerecorded telemarketing campaigns, especially franchise systems.
Key Compliance Lessons
| Lesson | Business Impact |
|---|---|
| Obtain clear consent | Do not assume consent exists |
| Simplify opt-outs | Easy unsubscribe systems matter |
| Review privacy policies | Fine-print disclaimers may backfire |
| Monitor franchise marketing | Parent companies may face liability |
| Arbitration is not guaranteed protection | Courts increasingly scrutinize waivers |
The Eric Carroll Confusion
There is another unrelated lawsuit involving a different plaintiff named Eric Carroll.
| Person | Case |
|---|---|
| Cindy Carroll | TCPA lawsuit against Sunflora |
| Eric Carroll | Privacy/data breach litigation against Staples |
These individuals are unrelated.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Cindy Carroll?
Cindy Carroll is a Florida consumer who filed a TCPA and FTSA class action lawsuit against Sunflora, Inc. alleging illegal prerecorded robocalls promoting CBD products.
Is Cindy Carroll a serial litigator?
No. She appears to have filed only one significant TCPA case and is not associated with high-volume professional litigation activity.
What is Carroll v. Sunflora about?
The lawsuit alleges Sunflora used prerecorded robocalls to market CBD products without proper consent.
What is the FTSA?
The Florida Telephone Solicitation Act is Florida’s state-level robocall protection statute.
What damages are being sought?
Carroll seeks statutory and treble damages, potentially up to $1,500 per violation.
Why is the opt-out process controversial?
Critics argue the process allegedly made it unnecessarily difficult for consumers to stop receiving calls.
Can Sunflora be liable for franchisee calls?
That is one of the primary legal questions being litigated.
Final Thoughts: A Consumer Plaintiff, Not a Professional Litigator
Cindy Carroll’s lawsuit against Sunflora stands apart from many high-profile TCPA cases involving serial litigators and professional plaintiffs. There are no allegations of fake identities, manufactured claims, deceptive call tactics, or mass litigation campaigns.
Instead, the case centers on a Florida consumer who alleges she received unwanted prerecorded robocalls promoting CBD products and decided to pursue legal remedies available under federal and state law.
The lawsuit also highlights growing concerns surrounding franchise marketing oversight, arbitration clauses, privacy policies, and opt-out procedures. As courts continue evaluating modern telemarketing practices, Carroll v. Sunflora may become an important case for both businesses and consumers navigating TCPA and FTSA compliance.
Unlike many professional plaintiffs scrutinized in modern TCPA litigation, Cindy Carroll appears to represent the kind of ordinary consumer the TCPA was designed to protect.
Sources & References
Primary Sources – Cindy Carroll Litigation
- https://natlawreview.com/article/sunfloras-cbd-robocall-fiasco-privacy-promises-or-just-blowing-smoke
- Carroll v. Sunflora, Inc., Case No. 8:24-cv-02047 (M.D. Fla. filed August 2024)
Secondary Sources – Legal Commentary
- TCPAWorld coverage discussing the Sunflora litigation
- National Law Review analysis regarding TCPA and FTSA claims
Additional Context
- Carroll v. Staples, Inc. (March 2026, Massachusetts District Court) involving Eric Carroll, unrelated to Cindy Carroll
Docket Information
- https://dockets.justia.com/docket/florida/flmdce/8:2024cv02047/431640
Disclaimer
This article is based on publicly available court filings, legal commentary, judicial rulings, and media reporting. Unlike some profiles involving high-volume TCPA litigators, Cindy Carroll is not characterized as a professional plaintiff or serial litigator. The allegations discussed remain subject to ongoing litigation and judicial determination. This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
