Hanna Holdings, the parent company of Howard Hanna Real Estate Services, has settled the homebuyer commission lawsuits.
In a filing in the Davis homebuyer commission lawsuit on Monday, attorneys for Hanna Holdings indicated that the company had reached a settlement agreement in the Tuccori home buyer commission lawsuit via an opt-in feature in that lawsuit’s master settlement.
This filing came after the Batton plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent Hanna Holdings from proceeding with its proposed settlement in the Tuccori lawsuit. Attorneys for Hanna Holdings argued that the Batton plaintiffs’ motion was improper and they notified the court that they would file a formal opposition to the motion by early April.
This is not the first time the Batton plaintiffs have sought to intervene in a corporate brokerage entity’s choice to settle the homebuyer commission lawsuit through the Tuccori settlement’s opt-in feature. In late February, the Batton plaintiffs filed a motion to intervene in the Tuccori lawsuit and a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to block Anywhere Real Estate from obtaining preliminary approval for the settlement the firm negotiated in the Tuccori suit via the opt-in mechanism.
Earlier this month, two U.S. District Court judges in Chicago denied the Batton plaintiffs’ motions. However, despite this, the Batton plaintiffs do not appear to be done trying to find ways to intervene in the Tuccori lawsuit.
On Monday, Anywhere filed a memorandum in the Batton lawsuit objecting to the Batton plaintiffs’ appointment of the Tuccori plaintiffs’ attorneys as interim co-lead counsel in the Batton lawsuit.
In early March, the Batton plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to add attorneys at Korein Tillery and Lowery Dannenberg to the Batton lawsuit as co-lead counsel. The Batton plaintiffs claim that they did this due to the overlapping nature of the two lawsuits and to provide “clarity” as to who is making decisions for the homebuyer classes in the two lawsuits.
In its memorandum, Anywhere argues that this is not an example of a case where a court would benefit from the appointment of interim class counsel for improved coordination among multiple sets of attorneys. Instead, Anywhere asserts that the Batton plaintiffs’s counsel is trying to insert itself into the Tuccori lawsuit and settlements so they can “obtain fees from any resulting settlements and gain leverage over the preliminarily approved class settlement involving Anywhere in Tuccori and the court-ordered opt-in procedure that permits additional settlements to proceed in Tuccori.”
Additionally, Anywhere argues that due to ongoing settlement proceedings in both lawsuits, combining the lawsuits in any way is not necessary and that appointing the Batton counsel as interim class counsel in the Tuccori lawsuit would “directly conflict with and risk disrupting the ongoing settlement approval proceedings in Tuccori.”
Given that the court has previously prevented the Batton plaintiffs from getting involved in the Tuccori, there is a chance that the courts may agree with Anywhere and Hanna Holdings.