This case study sought to comparatively analyze well-publicized auditor-client lawsuits between the years 2008 and 2018. The five lawsuits were all filed following the events on the Financial Crisis of 2008. This was done as the 2008 Financial Crisis signified a turning point in many prominent financial firms and the modern day economic landscape. With focus on the Big 4 Auditing firms as the defendants, the findings of this paper will allow for further analysis into the most critical aspects of these types of lawsuits. Specifically, pertaining to the cases’ both similar and dissimilar components. The five cases analyzed in this paper found common factors pertaining to the role of bankruptcy, as well as the role of the In Pari Delicto Doctrine in the defense strategy. Upon summary, it was determined the most successful iteration of the doctrine occurred in those cases where the strategy was combined with other laws and precedents. Furthermore, it was determined the failure of the doctrine in initial court proceedings such as, the motion to dismiss and the motion for summary judgement, lead to instances of settlement. Additionally, the cases primarily involved fraudulent activities or accounting errors, and focused on the role of the auditor in the collapse of the various clients’ firms. In the case of accounting errors, cases typically ended in settlement as well. After careful analysis, it can be inferred cases involving fraudulent behavior on the part of the clients, have a substantial impact on the successful utilization of the In Pari Delicto Doctrine. In the future, the scope of this case study can be expanded beyond well-publicized lawsuits.