Fifth Third Bank is in the Clear, Thanks to Williams & Connolly!
When you look back at major litigation sagas, they’re rarely decided overnight. The Klopfenstein v. Fifth Third Bank case was no exception — a decade-long odyssey of allegations, appeals, and class action drama that ultimately ended with a jury vindicating the bank. On April 27, 2023, an Ohio federal jury delivered the ending the bank’s side had long hoped for: judgment in Fifth Third’s favor, rejecting a $444 million breach-of-contract claim.
The plaintiffs had charged that Fifth Third’s “Early Access” cash‐advance loan program misrepresented its costs, pointing to what they claimed was an understated APR disclosure combined with higher effective rates. Over the years, the case saw twists: lower court dismissals, reversals, class certification, and extensive discovery. By the time trial started, the stakes were huge and the narrative framed by the plaintiffs was a David-vs-Goliath fight over predatory lending.
But behind Fifth Third’s defense was a formidable legal team at Williams & Connolly, marshaled by Enu Mainigi, Craig Singer, Steven Pyser, Amy McKinlay, and Timothy Pellegrino. They mounted a countervailing narrative: that the bank’s customers had ample disclosure, knew exactly what they were paying, and had accepted the terms repeatedly over many transactions.
The trial lasted eight days. Witnesses, expert reports, and cross-examination all hinged on a fundamental dispute: Did the disclosures, contracts, and customer confirmations put borrowers on notice of what they would pay? The defense urged the jury to see the logic and consistency in Fifth Third’s product design and communications.
And the jury agreed. It found that the plaintiffs could not establish damages, relying in part on Fifth Third’s “voluntary payment doctrine” defense (the argument that customers knowingly made the payments). With that, the plaintiffs’ $444 million claim collapsed, and Fifth Third walked away without liability at trial.
For Fifth Third, the win marked a rare victory in consumer class litigation, one of few defendants who risked taking their case to trial. The firm later resisted a motion for new trial, which the court denied — reinforcing the finality of the win (pending appeals). On the other side, plaintiffs’ counsel included noted names like Stuart E. Scott (Spangenberg Shibley & Liber), Hassan Zavareei (Tycko & Zavareei), and Jason Whittemore (Wagner McLaughlin) in their capacity as class counsel. From the vantage point of the defense, the case became an emblematic triumph: perseverance, thorough preparation, and faith in the strength of the contract and disclosure regime paid off. For Williams & Connolly, it became one of their celebrated trial highlights and reinforced their ability to defend large financial institutions in putative mass litigation. In the end, critics may continue to debate the fairness of consumer loan practices — but in the courtroom, Fifth Third and its legal champions prevailed when it counted most.
Tyson and Mendes Shut Down $16 Million Worth of Allegations
The case of Dorian v. Susini began like many high-stakes injury trials—with a powerful story from the plaintiff’s side and millions of dollars on the line. Dorian, a bicyclist injured in a 2021 collision, claimed that the defendant’s vehicle had struck her as it turned right on a red light. Her attorneys argued she suffered life-changing injuries that required multiple surgeries and ongoing medical care. They sought nearly $16 million in damages.
But the defense team, led by Jack Liebhaber and Cooper Jacobs of Tyson & Mendes, saw a different reality—one rooted in evidence, not emotion. From the beginning, they focused on the facts: that Dorian had been riding her bicycle on the sidewalk, against the flow of traffic, and entered the intersection from an unexpected angle. The defense believed the accident was the result of her own choices, not negligence by the driver.
The trial was anything but simple. Early in the proceedings, the defense’s accident reconstruction expert was excluded by the court, a ruling that could have severely limited their ability to challenge the plaintiff’s claims. Liebhaber and Jacobs fought back, securing a full evidentiary hearing under California’s Evidence Code. Their preparation paid off—the court reversed its decision, allowing the expert to testify. That moment changed the course of the trial.
While the plaintiff’s team brought a large group of attorneys and a jury consultant, the Tyson & Mendes duo relied on meticulous preparation and clear communication. They didn’t try to overwhelm the jury with theatrics. Instead, they focused on consistency and credibility. Every piece of evidence they presented worked to show that their client had acted reasonably and that the plaintiff’s own conduct was the true cause of the accident.
As the days went on, their calm, methodical approach began to resonate. The defense presented testimony showing that the bicycle’s position and movement violated basic traffic safety rules. Medical experts questioned whether the extent of Dorian’s injuries could be directly tied to the collision. Slowly, the jury began to see the gaps in the plaintiff’s case.
When deliberations ended, the verdict came down clearly: a complete defense win. The jury found no liability, and Dorian was awarded nothing. The $16 million demand evaporated, leaving the defense team’s client fully exonerated.
For Liebhaber and Jacobs, the verdict was more than a professional win—it was a statement about fairness in the courtroom. Their success showed that even in a system where large injury claims often pressure defendants to settle, careful preparation and faith in the truth can still carry the day. In the end, what stood out wasn’t a flashy argument or a dramatic twist, but the steady confidence of two lawyers who trusted their case and their craft.
