Judge denies request to halt NAR settlement in Tuccori
The deal can proceed, at least for now, though a similar request is with an appeals court. Plus, three Batton defendants respond to an amended complaint.
Just a day after asking the court to halt approval of a settlement reached by the National Association of Realtors, plaintiffs in the Batton homebuyer commissions case received a terse denial from the judge.
In a one-sentence ruling filed on April 29, Judge LaShonda A. Hunt informed the plaintiffs that their April 28 motion for a preliminary injunction — an attempt to prevent NAR's settlement in the related Tuccori case from moving forward — was denied "for the same reasons" she laid out in March in response to a similar request to block Anywhere's deal in that case.
How we got here: NAR, among other defendants in the Batton lawsuit, joined the Tuccori settlement instead of settling in Batton, a move allowed by an opt-in clause. The $52.25 million NAR deal was announced on April 10.
The Batton plaintiffs have objected to the Tuccori settlements, arguing that they are not in the best interests of the homebuyer class and are merely an attempt to "end-run" litigation in their case. So far, they have not succeeded in quashing the deals, although they have taken one of their requests to the appeals court.
Other defendants respond to amended complaint: The Batton lawsuit comprises two cases known as Batton 1 and Batton 2. They include the same plaintiffs and claims, but different defendants: NAR, Keller Williams, REMAX and Anywhere were named in the original suit, while Compass, eXp, Redfin, Weichert Realtors and United Real Estate were named in Batton 2.
Three of the Batton 2 parties — eXp, United and Redfin — filed responses on April 28 to the second amended complaint in the case. Most of the responses were short, boilerplate denials, but a few were more specific:
The defendants noted that requests for injunctive relief under Claim I, which refers to the Sherman Act, are essentially null and void since that claim was dismissed by the judge on March 24.
Regarding Claim II, which refers to violations of state laws, eXp pointed to the same dismissal, in which the judge tossed claims pertaining to 11 states.
In response to the assertion that NAR imposes rules on its members, eXp denied that NAR has required the brokerage to comply with its policies, while Redfin acknowledged that "NAR, from time to time, recommends certain rules," but said it had no knowledge as to whether or how those rules are adopted by members.
Redfin also presented an affirmative defense, noting that "to the extent any conspiracy existed (which Redfin denies), Redfin withdrew from and ceased any participation in such alleged conspiracy prior to the acts or damages alleged in the Second Amended Complaint and therefore cannot be held liable for any subsequent conduct of others."
United conceded that "there may be benefits for brokers related to NAR membership" — but denied that "its buyer-agent commissions were maintained at supracompetitive levels or that it steered home buyers." United also noted that it is not a member of NAR.
Where the Batton cases stand: Most defendants have either settled or are attempting to settle.
Keller Williams was the first to settle in Batton, announcing in early February that it had reached a $20 million agreement with the plaintiffs.
REMAX settled soon after for $8.5 million, a deal revealed via an SEC filing on March 19.
NAR, Anywhere, Compass and United have reached settlements in Tuccori that would resolve all homebuyer claims, including those in Batton, if approved.
Weichert is in talks with the Batton plaintiffs, and the parties have agreed to update the court on their negotiations by May 27, according to an April 20 filing.
eXp and Redfin have not announced settlements.