Gibson, Batton plaintiffs object to final approval of eXp, Weichert settlements

The objection deadline in the final approval process for commission lawsuit settlements reached by eXp World Holdings and Weichert Realtors in the Hooper commission lawsuit brought out several familiar names for those who have closely followed the commission lawsuit saga. 

On Friday, the Gibson home seller commission lawsuit plaintiffs, Don Gibson, Jeremy Keel and Daniel Umpa, filed their objection. In the filing, the Gibson plaintiffs maintain their earlier claims that eXp and Weichert conducted a reverse auction to arrive at their settlement agreements and settlement amounts.

As the Hooper litigation was not as far along as the Gibson suit when settlements were reached, and this was the first suit for the Hooper plaintiffs’ attorneys, they feel that in allegedly conducting a reverse auction with the Hooper plaintiffs, eXp and Weichert engaged in unfair procedures that produced inadequate settlements. Due to this, the Gibson plaintiffs argue that the settlements should be rejected. 

The Gibson plaintiffs first brought up their claims of a reverse auction in October 2024, just weeks after eXp announced that it had reached a settlement. These claims were extended to Weichert after it settled with the Hooper plaintiffs in November 2024. In March, Judge Mark H. Cohen of U.S. District Court in Atlanta denied the Gibson plaintiffs’ motion to intervene or move the suit to Missouri, where the Gibson suit and Sitzer/Burnett suits were litigated. 

The second objection was filed by James Mullis, a plaintiff in the Batton homebuyer commission lawsuits, on Monday. Mullis has previously objected to and/or appealed the final approval of commission lawsuit settlements reached by the National Association of Realtors (NAR), RE/MAX, Anywhere, and Keller Williams. 

In his objection, Mullins takes issue with the language defining released claims, which he feels is too broad. 

The settlement defines released claims as “any and all manner of federal and state claims regardless of the cause of action in any way arising from or relating to conduct that was alleged or could have been alleged in the Action arising from or related to any or all of the same factual predicates for the claims alleged in the Action, including but not limited to compensation negotiated, offered, obtained, or paid to brokerages in connection with the sale of any residential home.”

Mullis contends that the broad nature of this definition could be interpreted to release buy-side claims. As he has with the other settlement, Mullis argues that as the Hooper suit was filed by home sellers the claims made in the suit materially differ from those filed in the buy-side commission lawsuits like Batton, and that as such buyer claims should not be released by these settlements. 

The filing asks the court to clarify who the released parties are and to create a carve out for buyer claims. Mullis has previously made the same request of other settlements. 

Judge Cohen granted preliminary approval to these settlements in late May. A final approval hearing is scheduled for Oct. 28, 2025.