Opposition to approval of NAR’s settlement continues

The appeals of the final approval of the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) nationwide commission lawsuit settlement agreement by Judge Stephen R. Bough continue to roll in. On Tuesday, attorneys at Knie & Shealy, the law firm representing the Burton copycat commission lawsuit plaintiffs in South Carolina, filed an appeal with the Eighth Circuit Court of appeals.

According to the filing, they are appealing the final approval of NAR’s settlement and Judge Bough’s granting of the plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees, which resulted in the plaintiffs’ attorneys being awarded roughly $233 million in compensation and an additional $16.5 million to cover expenses.  

The Burton plaintiffs join copycat suit plaintiffs Robert Friedman, Monty March and the Spring Way Center in filing appeals. University of Buffalo law professor Tanya Monestier has also indicated an intention to appeal Judge Bough’s ruling, while Hao Zhe Wang, who is also a copycat suit plaintiff, filed a motion for reconsideration and an evidentiary hearing last week.

Like the other appellants, the Burton suit plaintiffs also filed an objection to NAR’s settlement prior to the final approval hearing. In their objection, the Burton plaintiffs took issue with the nationwide nature of the settlement, noting that all but one brokerage in South Carolina was not automatically grandfathered into the NAR settlement.

“In other states, it is certain that there were no such brokerages,” the objection states. “This settlement leaves those States with wrongdoers who will not be punished, despite having made substantial profits at the expense of residents of those States, all because Co-Lead Counsel are personally uninterested in pursuing suit against them, deeming them too small.”

The objection also claimed that not all of the brokerages and MLSs that opted into NAR’s settlement did so by the opt-in deadline. It notes that many parties opted in but did not execute their supplemental settlement agreements until well after the deadline. Additionally, the objectors feel that the selection of the $2 billion-per-year transaction volume threshold — and 2022 as the year to base the settlement amounts on — was arbitrary.

Judge Bough denied this and all other objections at the final approval hearing.