Key facts
- The Eighth Circuit upheld settlements for brokerages including Compass, Redfin, and Douglas Elliman in the Gibson commission lawsuit.
- The court found the challenges to these settlements were similar to those previously rejected for the National Association of Realtors' settlement.
- Objectors argued that the settlements improperly released claims from homebuyers and those involving non-NAR listing services.
- The appeals court determined that buyer and seller claims could be released together as they stemmed from the same alleged conduct.
- The court found no due-process violation despite objectors being required to attend fairness hearings in person.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has affirmed the approval of several settlements negotiated by brokerages in the Gibson commission lawsuit, a case mirroring the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) home seller commission lawsuit. This decision follows the same court's recent upholding of the NAR's settlement in the Sitzer/Burnett suit.
A three-judge panel stated that the challenges to the Gibson settlements were identical to those previously rejected by the court. The upheld settlements include those from Compass, Redfin, The Real Brokerage, Realty ONE Group, At World Properties, Douglas Elliman, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, and United Real Estate. These defendants agreed to the same business practice changes as outlined in NAR's settlement.
Objectors, including James Mullis, Monty March, Robert Friedman, and Benny Cheatham, argued that the Gibson settlements improperly released claims brought by homebuyers and those involving other non-NAR listing services, and that the settlements were inadequate. The appeals court rejected these arguments, stating that buyer and seller claims could be released together because they arose from the same alleged underlying conduct. The court also dismissed due-process violation claims, noting that objectors received notice, had an opportunity to present their objections, and that the district court considered these objections on their merits, despite requiring in-person attendance at fairness hearings.
Parties involved have two weeks from September 1 to file a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc.