Featured Cases

Fink + Associates Law attorneys are aggressive litigators who have been involved in numerous high stakes legal disputes.


Fink + Associates Law has been appointed by Judge Marianne Battani of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan to serve as Interim Liaison Counsel for the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs in the pending Automotive Parts Antitrust Multidistrict Litigation. This case arises from a massive U.S. Department of Justice investigation into allegations of bid rigging and price fixing in the auto parts industry. The Antitrust Division of the DOJ, as well as foreign antitrust authorities, have undertaken antitrust investigations, which have led to multiple guilty pleas and the assessment of very significant fines and jail sentences. In conjunction with lead counsel, Fink + Associates Law has successfully recovered over $100 million for direct purchasers of various automotive parts, including wire harnesses, instrument panel clusters, heater control panels, occupant safety systems and bearings.

The firm is currently liaison counsel for the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs for the following matters:

    • In re: Wire Harnesses
    • In re: Instrument Panel Clusters
    • In re: Heater Control Panels
    • In re: Occupant Safety Systems
    • In re: Bearings
    • In re: Fuel Senders
    • In re: Windshield Wiper Systems
    • In re: Starters
    • In re: Windshield Washers
    • In re: Air Conditioning Systems
    • In re: Alternators
    • In re: Fuel Injection Systems
    • In re: Ignition Coils
    • In re: Oxygen Sensors
    • In re: Power Window Motors
    • In re: Spark Plugs
    • In re: Small Bearings
    • In re: Automotive Hoses
    • In re: Electric Powered Steering Assemblies
    • In re: Exhaust Systems
    • In re: Shock Absorbers
    • In re: Anti-Vibrational Rubber Parts
    • In re: Automotive Brake Hoses
    • In re: HID Ballasts
    • In re: Switches
    • In re: Radiators
    • In re: Valve Timing Control Devices
    • In re: Ceramic Substrates
  • Fink + Associates Law represents Bucks County Employees Retirement Fund in a class action lawsuit filed against Ally Financial, Inc. and other defendants for Securities Act violations, arising out of negligently issued untrue statements of material facts and omitted material facts required to be stated in the Registration Statement and Offering Materials filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in support of Ally Financial, Inc.’s April 11, 2014 initial public offering.
  • Fink + Associates Law currently represents plaintiffs in the Equifax Multidistrict Litigation arising out of the largest data breach in U.S. history
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a billboard marketing company in an administrative action against the Michigan Department of Transportation regarding the placement of billboards along Michigan highways.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented an individual challenging an agency decision regarding insurance producer licensing.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a large employer with respect to a contested petition for union representation before the Michigan Employment Relations Commission.
  • Fink + Associates Law was appointed by Judge Marianne Battani of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan to serve as Interim Liaison Counsel for the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs in the pending Automotive Parts Antitrust Multidistrict Litigation. The cases, which have been consolidated in the Eastern District of Michigan, arise from a massive investigation into allegations of bid rigging and price fixing in the auto parts industry by the U.S. Department of Justice and numerous foreign antitrust regulators. The investigations led to multiple guilty pleas and the assessment of record fines and jail sentences. Working with lead counsel, Fink + Associates Law has, to date, successfully recovered over $100 million for direct purchasers of various automotive parts, including wire harnesses, instrument panel clusters, heater control panels, occupant safety systems and bearings.
  • Fink + Associates Law was appointed to serve as lead counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs in the Refrigerant Compressors Antitrust Litigation. After five years of litigation, the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs settled with (1) Tecumseh Products Company, Tecumseh Compressor Company, Tecumseh do Brasil, Ltda and their subsidiaries and affiliates; (2) Embraco North America, Inc., Whirlpool S.A. and their subsidiaries and; (3) Danfoss Flensburg GmbH, formerly Danfoss Compressors GmbH; and, (4) Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America and their subsidiaries and affiliates for the net total amount of $20,842,260.52.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a client in the investigation of potential anticompetitive conduct in the pharmaceutical industry. The firm provided advice to the client regarding the market and regarding possible legal challenges to the anticompetitive conduct.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a Fortune 500 company in the investigation of potential anticompetitive conduct in a new industry for the client. Fink + Associates Law was able to advise the client of potential anticompetitive conduct in the industry and was able to advise the client of legal strategies to address the conduct.
  • Fink + Associates Law was retained by a bankruptcy trustee to pursue litigation relating to a transaction in which the debtor was allegedly defrauded (leading, in part, to the bankruptcy filing). The firm was able to recover nearly the entire amount lost by the debtor.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented the largest creditor in bankruptcy proceedings for a large Illinois and Michigan company. The firm was able to collect a large percentage of the amount owed to its client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a debtor in a Chapter 7 liquidation action. The firm’s client had worked for the liquidating business for many years, and the bankruptcy trustee sought to repossess all of the money she earned. The firm successfully moved for dismissal of the claims against the firm’s client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represents the primary creditors in a large, complex bankruptcy involving a multi-million dollar healthcare business.
  • Fink + Associate Law was retained by a large debtor to challenge legal fees that had been billed to the debtor by its attorneys and consultants. The firm was able to obtain a large reduction in the amounts owing.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a law firm with respect to a dispute that arose when several of the partners left to form a rival firm. Fink + Associates successfully negotiation a resolution that was beneficial to its client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a law firm that was being sued by a former partner under various common law and contract theories. Fink + Associates Law was able to negotiate a resolution that was highly favorable to its client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented the founding partner of a healthcare organization in litigation between the founding partner and other owners of the organization. Fink + Associates Law negotiated a settlement that provided significant financial benefit to the client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a boat manufacturer in an action regarding a contract for sale of goods. After contentious litigation, the matter settled with Fink + Associates Law’s client obtaining a very favorable result.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a manufacturer in a breach of contract action regarding the termination of a dealer franchise agreement. After extensive litigation and mediation, the firm negotiated a favorable settlement on behalf of its client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented an independent sponsor in a lawsuit relating to an attempted squeeze out related to a business deal. The firm’s client presented a lucrative investment opportunity to various investors. The investors accepted the business opportunity and agreed to share the economic benefits with the firm’s client. The other investors, however, implemented a scheme to squeeze out Fink + Associates Law’s client and eliminate his economic benefits. After the firm filed a complaint and sought an injunction, the case quickly resolved through mediation, resulting in a beneficial settlement for Fink + Associates Law’s client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a large municipality in contentious litigation with a cable television operator, who, the municipality alleged, owed fees to the municipality under a franchise agreement. After oral argument in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the parties entered into mediation, where Fink + Associates Law obtained a very favorable settlement for the municipality.
  • At the end of its historic bankruptcy, the City of Detroit turned to Fink + Associates Law for representation to challenge the massive fees charged by lawyers, actuaries and other bankruptcy experts. With extraordinary time constraints, the firm succeeded in saving the City millions of dollars through a mediation process.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a public energy company in a lawsuit against a university for alleged underpayment of energy costs. After extensive litigation, Fink + Associates Law’s client received a favorable settlement. The resolution was a true win-win, as the settlement was structured in a manner to also benefit the university.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a governmental entity in breach of contract actions brought by municipal contractors. The trial court denied a motion to stay discovery while Fink + Associates Law’s motion for summary disposition was pending. Fink + Associates Law prevailed on an interlocutory appeal. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and ordered the matter stayed pending the resolution of the dispositive motion. Fink + Associates Law then obtained a complete dismissal of that case at the pleading stage, without any discovery.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a governmental entity in a dispute involving a sub-contractor involved in an abatement contract. The sub-contractor alleged that the governmental entity was unjustly enriched when the contractor failed to pay the sub-contractor. Fink + Associates Law obtained a dismissal of the case with prejudice after case evaluation and before trial, without any discovery.
  • Fink + Associates Law currently represents the Detroit Downtown Development Authority, Detroit Brownfield Redevelopment Authority, Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan and Thomas Lewand in litigation challenging the use of tax increment financing for the Little Caesars Arena in downtown Detroit, which is the home to the Detroit Red Wings and the Detroit Pistons. After extensive motion practice and multiple hearings in federal court, Fink + Associates Law’s clients prevailed, obtaining summary judgment. An appeal is currently pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented the highest ranking official of a municipality in a lawsuit alleging that the official was individually liable on a purported contract with a former employee.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented municipal entities in litigation to determine whether tax increment finance entities could capture taxes from revenue raised from a millage to support the municipal entities. The matter was resolved via new legislation that exempted Fink + Associates Law’s clients from having their millage taxes captured.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a municipality in a dispute with the State of Michigan regarding the use of federal grant money provided by the State. The firm negotiated a settlement with the State without resorting to litigation.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a municipality with respect to a dispute relating to the capture and use of tax increment revenue by a different municipality and its tax increment financing entities. A favorable settlement was reached without expending resources in litigation.
  • Fink + Associates Law has represented governmental entities in matters related to large-scale blight demolition programs. The firm has handled litigation in both trial courts and appellate courts involving contractor disputes and allegations of improper demolitions.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a group of property developers and managers in a dispute with a group of investors. On the eve of trial, the firm negotiated an advantageous settlement for the firm’s clients.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a group of investors in a renovation of a large building in downtown Detroit. The dispute arose when the firm’s clients’ partners surreptitiously sold a percentage of their interests in the development through a purported syndication. Without filing a lawsuit, the firm was able to negotiate a fair resolution that improved the partnership relationship for the firm’s clients.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a class of plaintiffs in a class action against a bank and its officers and directors arising from the alleged improper assessment, collection and disclosure of overdraft fees, including those fees that were assessed due to the bank’s high-to-low debit card transaction sequencing practice. After litigating the case for over three-and-a-half years, Fink + Associates Law and its co-counsel negotiated a large payment for the class.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a class of plaintiffs in a class action against a large bank relating to improper collection of excessive overdraft fees from its customers. After the Court denied the bank’s motion for summary judgment, Fink + Associates Law and its co-counsel obtained a large settlement on behalf of the class.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a company accused of sending spam emails. Fink + Associates Law obtained complete dismissal of the lawsuit prior to class certification.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a pharmaceutical wholesaler accused in a putative class action of making misleading claims relating to products sold. Fink + Associates Law able to obtain a very favorable settlement for its client prior to class certification.
  • Fink + Associates represented a company accused of violating the Telephone Consumer Privacy Act by allegedly sending unsolicited marketing text messages. The firm was able to obtain a very favorable class settlement for its client.
  • Fink + Associates Law served as co-counsel representing a class of shareholders who were objecting to the terms of a proposed merger. The matter was settled by the acquiring company increasing the value of its offer and providing additional disclosures.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a large employer with respect to a contested petition for union representation. Near the end of the administrative proceedings in the matter, the Michigan Legislature and Governor enacted targeted legislation that changed the labor laws in dispute. Fink + Associates Law challenged the new legislation and federal court and obtained a ruling that the law was unconstitutionally enacted.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a minority owner of an automobile dealership in a Title VII sexual harassment claim against the majority owner of the dealership. Shortly before trial, the firm was able to negotiate a large settlement of the matter.
  • Representation of employer in Elliot Larsen Civil Rights Act lawsuit (AIT)
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a class of plaintiffs against Enbridge Inc. after one of its pipelines leaked and sent an estimated 843,000 gallons of crude oil into Talmadge Creek and the Kalamazoo River, creating the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history. The settlement required the company to pay millions of dollars to residents and land owners of properties near the river.
  • Fink + Associates Law represents a local municipality and downtown development authority, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated property owners, in a lawsuit brought against another governmental entity regarding a dispute over the remediation of contaminants at a landfill operated by a different municipality. Fink + Associates Law’s clients filed the lawsuit to recover environmental responses costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA).
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a Fortune 100 company in a successor liability suit relating to contamination at a site owned by the company. After obtaining several very favorable rulings, the case was settled on terms very favorable to the client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented the minority owner of a large company in a dispute relating to oppressive conduct by the shareholder and the distribution of revenue derived from the sale of the corporation. Despite obtaining several unfavorable rulings by the trial court, Fink + Associates Law was able to settle the matter on terms favorable to the client.
  • Fink + Associates Law represented a minority shareholder in a healthcare company, who had not received appropriate distributions and improperly forced out of the company. Fink + Associates Law obtained a very favorable settlement for its client, who was able to use the settlement proceeds to start a very successful competitor company.