Commissions lawsuits

The lawsuits may seem like old news, but not everyone has moved on. An appeals court is reviewing objections that have the potential to invalidate the deals.

After months of sparring between attorneys in the Hooper and Gibson commissions lawsuits, a Georgia judge has allowed the deals to move forward.

The Gibson case continues, however, with Crye-Leike and a Warren Buffet-owned company still pushing back, and other settlements facing challenges.

Judge Stephen Bough will continue to oversee the case despite efforts by multiple defendants to have him removed over an alleged conflict of interest.

Details of the deal were not disclosed in the April 8 filing. Meanwhile, a few of the remaining defendants are trying to get the judge removed from the case.

The $3.95 million settlement aligns with NAR math, but unlike NAR’s agreement, allows the Massachusetts MLS to continue displaying offers of compensation.

The judge in Georgia’s Hooper case said the Missouri home sellers can file objections but can’t intervene to stop the settlement process from moving forward.

MLS PIN and the plaintiffs refuted the DOJ’s recent claim that the agreement only “maintains the status quo”; Keel, Gibson lawyers ask for their paychecks.

This week the federal agency weighed in — again — on the 5-year-old case, arguing that revisions to the 2023 deal are only cosmetic.

Gibson home sellers join the brokerage in asking the court to put the suit on hold so they can file details as the judge faces a request to recuse himself.

The Tennessee-based brokerage tried to convince the court that it should be covered under the NAR settlement, but that request was denied.

Attorneys in the Hooper case defended the deals they reached with the brokerages and accused Gibson lawyers of trying to “line their own pockets.”

Several smaller brokerages and two MLSs named in the Keel and Gibson cases are scheduled for a final hearing on June 24.

The arguments over reverse auction allegations continued this week, with the plaintiffs saying the brokerages shopped around to “settle on the cheap.”

The brokerage denied using a reverse auction strategy to reach its $34 million settlement, arguing that the amount is comparable to what other firms paid.

Court documents lay out the details of the landmark Sitzer/Burnett settlement, including who’s in (covered parties and opt-ins) and sellers who opted out.

The companies were among the remaining entities not covered by NAR’s deal. They quickly agreed to settle, paying more than $10.5 million in combined damages.

Baird & Warner and Real Estate One will add another $3.7 million to the fund, while the MLS PIN case moves forward after an extended pause.

Watch the conversation with NAR’s general counsel as she answers the big, lingering questions about the commissions deal, gives an update on appeals and more.

The judge in the Gibson/Umpa case filed an order laying out “plausible evidence” that the brokerages used a reverse auction strategy to find the best deal.