Andrew Perrong: The “Robocall Avenger” Who Went from Teenage TCPA Plaintiff to Licensed Attorney

 

Andrew Roman Perrong has one of the most unusual stories in the history of Telephone Consumer Protection Act litigation. He began filing lawsuits against telemarketers in 2015 while still in high school, years before he became a licensed attorney. Today, Perrong is a Pennsylvania lawyer, operates Perrong Law LLC, has participated in more than 200 TCPA and consumer protection cases, and has helped obtain class action settlements totaling more than $9 million.

Unlike many of the serial litigators discussed in TCPA commentary, Perrong followed a different path. He did not remain a pro se plaintiff indefinitely. Instead, he attended law school, passed the Pennsylvania bar, and transitioned into a full-time plaintiff-side attorney representing consumers in TCPA actions.

His reputation, however, remains controversial. Some judges criticized his early litigation tactics before he became licensed. Defense-side commentators have labeled him a habitual litigant, while supporters view him as an aggressive consumer advocate willing to challenge telemarketing practices that many others ignore.

What is clear is that Andrew Perrong has become one of the most recognizable names in modern TCPA litigation.

Who Is Andrew Perrong?

Andrew Roman Perrong is a Pennsylvania-licensed attorney who focuses heavily on TCPA and consumer protection litigation through his law firm, Perrong Law LLC.

Public records and professional sources identify the following details about him:

• Full name: Andrew Roman Perrong
• Born: November 1996
• Age: 29
• Pennsylvania Bar ID: 333687
• Admitted to practice: October 10, 2023
• Current reported address: Portland, Oregon
• Pennsylvania office location: Glenside, Pennsylvania
• Law firm: Perrong Law LLC
• Websites: perronglaw.com and tcpatalk.com

Public records also list several name variations associated with him, including:

• Anrew R Perrong
• Andrew Terrong
• Andy Perrong

Unlike many repeat TCPA plaintiffs, Perrong eventually transformed his litigation activity into a licensed legal practice. That transition is one of the defining features of his career.

From High School Litigant to Licensed Lawyer

Perrong reportedly began filing TCPA lawsuits around 2015 when he was still a teenager. At the time, he represented himself in many cases and quickly became known within TCPA circles for aggressively pursuing telemarketing claims.

His progression can generally be summarized as follows:

• Began filing TCPA lawsuits as a teenager in 2015
• Continued litigating cases throughout his late teens and early twenties
• Attended law school while remaining active in TCPA litigation
• Passed the Pennsylvania bar in 2023
• Launched Perrong Law LLC as a plaintiff-side consumer protection practice

By the time he became licensed, Perrong had already built a reputation in TCPA litigation communities, both among plaintiff attorneys and defense firms.

The Origin of the “Robocall Avenger” Nickname

The Philadelphia Inquirer reportedly referred to Perrong as the “Robocall Avenger,” a nickname he later embraced publicly.

His law firm website states that he began suing telemarketers while still in high school and has since litigated more than 200 TCPA and consumer protection cases.

Perrong also highlights two class action settlements totaling approximately $9.05 million, describing them as achievements he is particularly proud of.

Rather than distancing himself from the nickname, Perrong incorporated the persona into his public image. His plaintiff-side blog, TCPATalk, frequently references the “Avenger” branding and positions itself as a counterweight to defense-oriented TCPA commentary.

Judicial Criticism During the Pre-Bar Years

Although Perrong later became a licensed attorney, several judges criticized aspects of his conduct during his years as a pro se litigant.

In one notable ruling, a federal judge accused Perrong of engaging in what the court called “gamesmanship of the lowest order.” The opinion criticized conduct that allegedly included ignoring communications from opposing counsel while simultaneously seeking default judgment.

Another court reportedly referred to him as a “habitual litigant.”

Defense-side commentators used those rulings to question whether Perrong’s litigation style was motivated more by aggressive procedural strategy than traditional consumer advocacy.

At the same time, supporters argue that TCPA defendants frequently attempt to minimize legitimate consumer claims and that aggressive tactics are sometimes necessary to force compliance.

Perrong Law LLC and Consumer Litigation

Today, Perrong operates Perrong Law LLC, a consumer protection practice focused largely on TCPA litigation.

According to publicly available descriptions of the firm:

• The practice focuses on robocall and telemarketing litigation
• Perrong represents plaintiffs in consumer protection cases
• The firm has participated in more than 200 TCPA-related matters
• Perrong helped secure two class action settlements worth approximately $9.05 million combined

While critics continue to focus on his early litigation tactics, supporters point to those settlement figures as evidence that his work has produced meaningful recoveries for consumers.

TCPATalk vs. TCPAWorld

One of the more interesting aspects of Perrong’s career is his online rivalry with defense attorney Eric Troutman.

Troutman operates TCPAWorld, a widely known defense-oriented TCPA publication. Perrong later launched TCPATalk, which presents itself as a plaintiff-side counterpart.

The rivalry is often framed as:

• TCPAWorld representing corporate and defense interests
• TCPATalk representing consumer and plaintiff perspectives

Perrong refers to himself as “the Avenger,” while Troutman is often referred to as “the Czar” of TCPAWorld.

Despite representing opposite sides of TCPA litigation, the relationship between the two appears more professional than hostile. Perrong has appeared on Troutman’s “Deserve to Win” podcast, and both have publicly discussed the future of telemarketing compliance and TCPA enforcement.

A Controversial Figure Among Defense Firms

Defense-side legal commentators remain skeptical of Perrong.

Some criticisms frequently raised include:

• His long history of high-volume TCPA litigation
• Judicial criticism from his pre-attorney years
• Aggressive procedural tactics
• Allegations of overly confrontational litigation behavior

TCPAWorld once described him as a controversial figure with claims of suspicious conduct surrounding certain cases.

At the same time, Perrong’s defenders argue that telemarketing violations remain widespread and that consumer attorneys play an important role in enforcing the law when regulators fail to act.

Connections to Other High-Volume TCPA Litigators

Perrong has also been linked in commentary to a broader network of active TCPA litigators sometimes referred to by critics as “professional plaintiffs” or “serial litigators.”

Names commonly mentioned in those discussions include:

• Mark Dobronski
• Brandon Callier
• James Sheldon
• Anton Ewing
• Yazmin Gonzalez

What distinguishes Perrong from many others in that group is that he ultimately became a licensed attorney and now represents clients directly instead of filing only pro se cases.

That difference significantly changes how courts and legal observers view his role in TCPA litigation.

Relocation and Public Records Information

Public records indicate that Perrong has lived at multiple addresses in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Oregon over the past several years.

As of 2026, records associate him with Portland, Oregon, though his law firm remains tied to Pennsylvania.

Records also identify possible family connections in the Philadelphia suburbs, including relatives in Southampton and Warminster, Pennsylvania.

The Aircraft Ownership Detail

One unusual detail found in public records is the reported ownership or registration of a Piper PA-28R-200 aircraft.

The aircraft registration has attracted attention because it is uncommon for a relatively young consumer attorney to own a private aircraft. Observers have speculated that the asset may reflect substantial litigation income, personal wealth, or family resources.

No public reporting suggests the aircraft ownership itself is connected to wrongdoing.

How Perrong Differs from Other TCPA Litigators

Andrew Perrong occupies a unique category within the TCPA world.

Unlike James Sheldon, he is not an elderly pro se litigant pursuing dozens of cases from a private apartment.

Unlike Anton Ewing, he does not carry the same type of criminal controversy.

Unlike many repeat plaintiffs, Perrong became formally licensed and built an actual legal practice around TCPA enforcement.

His critics continue to question aspects of his litigation approach, but his transition into a licensed attorney fundamentally separates him from many traditional serial plaintiffs.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Andrew Perrong a licensed attorney?

Yes. Andrew Perrong was admitted to the Pennsylvania bar on October 10, 2023, under Bar ID #333687.

How many TCPA cases has Perrong handled?

Public descriptions from his law firm state that he has litigated more than 200 TCPA and consumer protection cases since 2015.

Why is he called the “Robocall Avenger”?

The nickname reportedly originated from media coverage and was later adopted by Perrong himself through his law firm branding and TCPATalk website.

What is TCPATalk?

TCPATalk is a plaintiff-oriented TCPA blog operated by Perrong. It positions itself as a counterpart to Eric Troutman’s defense-focused TCPAWorld.

Has Perrong been criticized by judges?

Yes. During his pre-attorney years as a pro se litigant, some judges criticized aspects of his litigation conduct, including what one court described as “gamesmanship of the lowest order.”

What settlements has Perrong helped secure?

Perrong publicly states that he participated in two class action settlements totaling approximately $9.05 million.

Does Perrong still represent himself in cases?

Today, Perrong primarily operates as a licensed attorney representing plaintiffs through Perrong Law LLC.

Final Thoughts

Andrew Roman Perrong represents a rare evolution within TCPA litigation.

He began as a teenage pro se plaintiff aggressively pursuing telemarketing cases long before entering the legal profession. Along the way, he drew criticism from judges and defense attorneys who questioned his tactics and motivations.

But Perrong did not remain a self-represented litigant. He attended law school, became licensed in Pennsylvania, launched a law firm, and transitioned into a full-time plaintiff-side attorney representing consumers in TCPA litigation.

Whether viewed as an aggressive consumer advocate or a controversial high-volume litigator, Perrong has undeniably become one of the most visible figures in modern TCPA enforcement.

The teenager who once sued telemarketers from outside the legal establishment is now a practicing attorney known across the TCPA world as the “Robocall Avenger.”

Sources & References

Primary Sources

• https://www.perronglaw.com/about
• https://www.tcpatalk.com/about
• https://tcpaworld.com/2023/10/10/real-or-make-believe-so-andrew-perrong-is-a-lawyer-now-apparently-but-maybe-not-and-this-could-be-a-big-deal/
• https://www.youdeservetowin.com/topic/guests
• Pennsylvania Bar records (Attorney ID #333687)

Secondary Sources

• https://tcpaworld.com/2025/03/17/once-a-business-number-not-always-a-business-number-court-finds-shelton-can-sue-for-b2b-calls-to-number-that-he-used-to-use-for-business-purposes-but-not-anymore/

Public Records References

Information summarized from publicly available records reportedly associated with Andrew Roman Perrong, including address history, aircraft registration information, and related background details.

Disclaimer

This article is based on publicly available court filings, legal commentary, media reporting, professional licensing records, and publicly accessible background information. Andrew Perrong is a licensed Pennsylvania attorney and plaintiff-side TCPA litigator. References to criticism or controversy reflect commentary and judicial observations contained in public records and legal reporting. Public records information may not always be complete or current. This article is intended solely for informational and educational purposes and should not be interpreted as legal advice.