Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Representatives from eXp and Weichert will be deposed next week as the real estate companies attempt to fight off allegations they negotiated a “sweetheart deal” to resolve commission-related antitrust claims against them nationwide.

Attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a case known as Gibson informed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri on Friday that on March 5 and 7, respectively, they will take videotaped depositions of the designated representatives of Weichert and eXp “best able to testify” under oath regarding settlement negotiations in a separate, but similar, lawsuit known as Hooper.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR FEBRUARY

“[EXp] has a duty to designate one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons with knowledge to testify fully regarding the topics listed in Exhibit 1,” one of the filings reads.

“eXp must also promptly confer in good faith about the matters for examination. The deposition(s) will be taken before a Notary Public or some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths for use at trial.”

Both Weichert and eXp attempted to reach settlements in the Gibson case last year, but negotiations broke down, and the companies instead mediated nationwide settlements with attorneys for plaintiffs in Hooper, agreeing to pay $8.5 million and $34 million, respectively.

The Missouri court is currently weighing claims by the Gibson plaintiffs that eXp and Weichert engaged in a “reverse auction,” or a legal strategy in which a defendant negotiates a settlement with attorneys who are willing to accept settlement amounts less than attorneys in a separate case.

In a statement, eXp spokesperson Noor Marzook told Inman, “[W]e remain focused on securing approval of our settlement of the seller-side commission cases and confident the Georgia judge overseeing the Hooper case will find the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.” The company declined to say who would testify at the deposition on eXp’s behalf.

Inman has reached out to Weichert for comment and will update this story if and when a response is received.

According to Friday’s legal filings, the representatives of the companies will be asked to cover these nine topics:

• Communications between eXp/Weichert and any mediator used or considered in connection with any settlement negotiations in the Hooper case.
• Communications between eXp/Weichert and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case, including but not limited to all substantive settlement communications, scheduling communications, mediation statements, financial documents, and draft and final settlement agreements.
• Communications between eXp and Weichert regarding any settlement negotiations or agreements in the Hooper case.
• Any documents provided to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case in advance of mediation.
• Any binding term sheet executed in the Hooper case.
• The Settlement Agreement executed in the Hooper case, including but not limited to the amount agreed to be paid.
• Any disclosures to any mediator and/or plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case regarding settlement negotiations actually conducted or that might be conducted with plaintiffs’ counsel in the Gibson case, Umpa case, or any other case alleging an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Settlement communications with plaintiffs’ counsel in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Communications with any mediator in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.

Separately, on Monday, Feb. 24, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied motions to compel arbitration and stay the case filed by two other defendants in the case, William Raveis Real Estate and Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), the parent company of HomeServices of America. The companies had asked that members of the purported class for Gibson be forced to abide by arbitration agreements they signed as homesellers.

Bough rejected the motions because the Gibson case has not yet received class certification and “absent class members are not parties to a case until a class is certified,” so they are not yet subject to the court’s jurisdiction.

More significantly, however, Bough noted that neither BHE or Raveis had signed such agreements themselves. Rather, homesellers had signed them with the companies’ affiliates.

“As this Court and the Eighth Circuit have previously held, nonparties cannot enforce contracts and therefore cannot compel arbitration,” Bough wrote.

The Gibson suit was the first antitrust commission suit filed after an October 2023 jury verdict in the Sitzer | Burnett case awarded billions to a class of homeseller plaintiffs in Missouri.

Like Sitzer | Burnett, the Gibson suit challenges a now-defunct National Association of Realtors rule requiring listing brokers to offer compensation to buyer brokers in order to submit a listing to a multiple listing service, which the plaintiffs allege violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

But the Gibson suit’s scope is potentially much bigger than that of its predecessor: Gibson seeks class-action status on behalf of “all persons who listed properties on a Multiple Listing Service in the United States using a listing agent or broker affiliated with” the corporate defendants and who paid a buyer broker commission from Oct. 31, 2019, until the present.

Several other defendants have settled the Gibson case, including Compass, Douglas Elliman, The Real Brokerage, @properties, Redfin, Realty ONE Group, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, United Real Estate, NextHome, the Keyes Company, John L. Scott Real Estate Affiliates, The K Company Realty, Real Estate One and Baird & Warner.

Bough has granted preliminary approval to those deals and a final approval hearing for the deals is scheduled on June 24 at 1:30 p.m. Central.

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Representatives from eXp and Weichert will be deposed next week as the real estate companies attempt to fight off allegations they negotiated a “sweetheart deal” to resolve commission-related antitrust claims against them nationwide.

Attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a case known as Gibson informed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri on Friday that on March 5 and 7, respectively, they will take videotaped depositions of the designated representatives of Weichert and eXp “best able to testify” under oath regarding settlement negotiations in a separate, but similar, lawsuit known as Hooper.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR FEBRUARY

“[EXp] has a duty to designate one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons with knowledge to testify fully regarding the topics listed in Exhibit 1,” one of the filings reads.

“eXp must also promptly confer in good faith about the matters for examination. The deposition(s) will be taken before a Notary Public or some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths for use at trial.”

Both Weichert and eXp attempted to reach settlements in the Gibson case last year, but negotiations broke down, and the companies instead mediated nationwide settlements with attorneys for plaintiffs in Hooper, agreeing to pay $8.5 million and $34 million, respectively.

The Missouri court is currently weighing claims by the Gibson plaintiffs that eXp and Weichert engaged in a “reverse auction,” or a legal strategy in which a defendant negotiates a settlement with attorneys who are willing to accept settlement amounts less than attorneys in a separate case.

In a statement, eXp spokesperson Noor Marzook told Inman, “[W]e remain focused on securing approval of our settlement of the seller-side commission cases and confident the Georgia judge overseeing the Hooper case will find the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.” The company declined to say who would testify at the deposition on eXp’s behalf.

Inman has reached out to Weichert for comment and will update this story if and when a response is received.

According to Friday’s legal filings, the representatives of the companies will be asked to cover these nine topics:

• Communications between eXp/Weichert and any mediator used or considered in connection with any settlement negotiations in the Hooper case.
• Communications between eXp/Weichert and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case, including but not limited to all substantive settlement communications, scheduling communications, mediation statements, financial documents, and draft and final settlement agreements.
• Communications between eXp and Weichert regarding any settlement negotiations or agreements in the Hooper case.
• Any documents provided to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case in advance of mediation.
• Any binding term sheet executed in the Hooper case.
• The Settlement Agreement executed in the Hooper case, including but not limited to the amount agreed to be paid.
• Any disclosures to any mediator and/or plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case regarding settlement negotiations actually conducted or that might be conducted with plaintiffs’ counsel in the Gibson case, Umpa case, or any other case alleging an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Settlement communications with plaintiffs’ counsel in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Communications with any mediator in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.

Separately, on Monday, Feb. 24, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied motions to compel arbitration and stay the case filed by two other defendants in the case, William Raveis Real Estate and Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), the parent company of HomeServices of America. The companies had asked that members of the purported class for Gibson be forced to abide by arbitration agreements they signed as homesellers.

Bough rejected the motions because the Gibson case has not yet received class certification and “absent class members are not parties to a case until a class is certified,” so they are not yet subject to the court’s jurisdiction.

More significantly, however, Bough noted that neither BHE or Raveis had signed such agreements themselves. Rather, homesellers had signed them with the companies’ affiliates.

“As this Court and the Eighth Circuit have previously held, nonparties cannot enforce contracts and therefore cannot compel arbitration,” Bough wrote.

The Gibson suit was the first antitrust commission suit filed after an October 2023 jury verdict in the Sitzer | Burnett case awarded billions to a class of homeseller plaintiffs in Missouri.

Like Sitzer | Burnett, the Gibson suit challenges a now-defunct National Association of Realtors rule requiring listing brokers to offer compensation to buyer brokers in order to submit a listing to a multiple listing service, which the plaintiffs allege violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

But the Gibson suit’s scope is potentially much bigger than that of its predecessor: Gibson seeks class-action status on behalf of “all persons who listed properties on a Multiple Listing Service in the United States using a listing agent or broker affiliated with” the corporate defendants and who paid a buyer broker commission from Oct. 31, 2019, until the present.

Several other defendants have settled the Gibson case, including Compass, Douglas Elliman, The Real Brokerage, @properties, Redfin, Realty ONE Group, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, United Real Estate, NextHome, the Keyes Company, John L. Scott Real Estate Affiliates, The K Company Realty, Real Estate One and Baird & Warner.

Bough has granted preliminary approval to those deals and a final approval hearing for the deals is scheduled on June 24 at 1:30 p.m. Central.

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Representatives from eXp and Weichert will be deposed next week as the real estate companies attempt to fight off allegations that they negotiated a “sweetheart deal” to resolve commission-related antitrust claims against them nationwide.

On Feb. 21, attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a case known as Gibson informed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri that on March 5 and 7, respectively, they will take videotaped depositions of the designated representatives of Weichert and eXp “best able to testify” under oath regarding settlement negotiations in a separate, but similar, commission suit known as Hooper.

“eXp has a duty to designate one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons with knowledge to testify fully regarding the topics listed in Exhibit 1,” one of the filings reads.

“eXp must also promptly confer in good faith about the matters for examination. The deposition(s) will be taken before a Notary Public or some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths for use at trial.”

Both Weichert and eXp attempted to reach settlements in the Gibson case last year, but negotiations broke down, and the companies instead mediated nationwide settlements with attorneys for plaintiffs in Hooper, agreeing to pay $8.5 million and $34 million, respectively.

The Missouri court is currently weighing claims by the Gibson plaintiffs that eXp and Weichert engaged in a “reverse auction,” or a legal strategy in which a defendant negotiates a settlement with attorneys who are willing to accept settlement amounts less than attorneys in a separate case.

In a statement, eXp spokesperson Noor Marzook told Inman, “[W]e remain focused on securing approval of our settlement of the seller-side commission cases and confident the Georgia judge overseeing the Hooper case will find the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.” The company declined to say who would testify at the deposition on eXp’s behalf.

Inman has reached out to Weichert for comment and will update this story if and when a response is received.

According to Friday’s legal filings, the representatives of the companies will be asked to cover these nine topics:

• Communications between eXp/Weichert and any mediator used or considered in connection with any settlement negotiations in the Hooper case.
• Communications between eXp/Weichert and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case, including but not limited to all substantive settlement communications, scheduling communications, mediation statements, financial documents, and draft and final settlement agreements.
• Communications between eXp and Weichert regarding any settlement negotiations or agreements in the Hooper case.
• Any documents provided to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case in advance of mediation.
• Any binding term sheet executed in the Hooper case.
• The Settlement Agreement executed in the Hooper case, including but not limited to the amount agreed to be paid.
• Any disclosures to any mediator and/or plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case regarding settlement negotiations actually conducted or that might be conducted with plaintiffs’ counsel in the Gibson case, Umpa case, or any other case alleging an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Settlement communications with plaintiffs’ counsel in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Communications with any mediator in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.

Separately, on Monday, Feb. 24, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied motions to compel arbitration and stay the case filed by two other defendants in the case, William Raveis Real Estate and Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), the parent company of HomeServices of America. The companies had asked that members of the purported class for Gibson be forced to abide by arbitration agreements they signed as homesellers.

Bough rejected the motions because the Gibson case has not yet received class certification and “absent class members are not parties to a case until a class is certified,” so they are not yet subject to the court’s jurisdiction.

More significantly, however, Bough noted that neither BHE or Raveis had signed such agreements themselves. Rather, homesellers had signed them with the companies’ affiliates.

“As this Court and the Eighth Circuit have previously held, nonparties cannot enforce contracts and therefore cannot compel arbitration,” Bough wrote.

The Gibson suit was the first antitrust commission suit filed after an October 2023 jury verdict in the Sitzer | Burnett case awarded billions to a class of homeseller plaintiffs in Missouri.

Like Sitzer | Burnett, the Gibson suit challenges a now-defunct National Association of Realtors rule requiring listing brokers to offer compensation to buyer brokers in order to submit a listing to a multiple listing service, which the plaintiffs allege violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

But the Gibson suit’s scope is potentially much bigger than that of its predecessor: Gibson seeks class-action status on behalf of “all persons who listed properties on a Multiple Listing Service in the United States using a listing agent or broker affiliated with” the corporate defendants and who paid a buyer broker commission from Oct. 31, 2019, until the present.

Several other defendants have settled the Gibson case, including Compass, Douglas Elliman, The Real Brokerage, @properties, Redfin, Realty ONE Group, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, United Real Estate, NextHome, the Keyes Company, John L. Scott Real Estate Affiliates, The K Company Realty, Real Estate One and Baird & Warner.

Bough has granted preliminary approval to those deals and a final approval hearing for the deals is scheduled on June 24 at 1:30 p.m. Central.

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Representatives from eXp and Weichert will be deposed next week as the real estate companies attempt to fight off allegations that they negotiated a “sweetheart deal” to resolve commission-related antitrust claims against them nationwide.

On Feb. 21, attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a case known as Gibson informed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri that on March 5 and 7, respectively, they will take videotaped depositions of the designated representatives of Weichert and eXp “best able to testify” under oath regarding settlement negotiations in a separate, but similar, commission suit known as Hooper.

“eXp has a duty to designate one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons with knowledge to testify fully regarding the topics listed in Exhibit 1,” one of the filings reads.

“eXp must also promptly confer in good faith about the matters for examination. The deposition(s) will be taken before a Notary Public or some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths for use at trial.”

Both Weichert and eXp attempted to reach settlements in the Gibson case last year, but negotiations broke down, and the companies instead mediated nationwide settlements with attorneys for plaintiffs in Hooper, agreeing to pay $8.5 million and $34 million, respectively.

The Missouri court is currently weighing claims by the Gibson plaintiffs that eXp and Weichert engaged in a “reverse auction,” or a legal strategy in which a defendant negotiates a settlement with attorneys who are willing to accept settlement amounts less than attorneys in a separate case.

In a statement, eXp spokesperson Noor Marzook told Inman, “[W]e remain focused on securing approval of our settlement of the seller-side commission cases and confident the Georgia judge overseeing the Hooper case will find the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.” The company declined to say who would testify at the deposition on eXp’s behalf.

Inman has reached out to Weichert for comment and will update this story if and when a response is received.

According to Friday’s legal filings, the representatives of the companies will be asked to cover these nine topics:

• Communications between eXp/Weichert and any mediator used or considered in connection with any settlement negotiations in the Hooper case.
• Communications between eXp/Weichert and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case, including but not limited to all substantive settlement communications, scheduling communications, mediation statements, financial documents, and draft and final settlement agreements.
• Communications between eXp and Weichert regarding any settlement negotiations or agreements in the Hooper case.
• Any documents provided to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case in advance of mediation.
• Any binding term sheet executed in the Hooper case.
• The Settlement Agreement executed in the Hooper case, including but not limited to the amount agreed to be paid.
• Any disclosures to any mediator and/or plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case regarding settlement negotiations actually conducted or that might be conducted with plaintiffs’ counsel in the Gibson case, Umpa case, or any other case alleging an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Settlement communications with plaintiffs’ counsel in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Communications with any mediator in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.

Separately, on Monday, Feb. 24, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied motions to compel arbitration and stay the case filed by two other defendants in the case, William Raveis Real Estate and Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), the parent company of HomeServices of America. The companies had asked that members of the purported class for Gibson be forced to abide by arbitration agreements they signed as homesellers.

Bough rejected the motions because the Gibson case has not yet received class certification and “absent class members are not parties to a case until a class is certified,” so they are not yet subject to the court’s jurisdiction.

More significantly, however, Bough noted that neither BHE or Raveis had signed such agreements themselves. Rather, homesellers had signed them with the companies’ affiliates.

“As this Court and the Eighth Circuit have previously held, nonparties cannot enforce contracts and therefore cannot compel arbitration,” Bough wrote.

The Gibson suit was the first antitrust commission suit filed after an October 2023 jury verdict in the Sitzer | Burnett case awarded billions to a class of homeseller plaintiffs in Missouri.

Like Sitzer | Burnett, the Gibson suit challenges a now-defunct National Association of Realtors rule requiring listing brokers to offer compensation to buyer brokers in order to submit a listing to a multiple listing service, which the plaintiffs allege violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

But the Gibson suit’s scope is potentially much bigger than that of its predecessor: Gibson seeks class-action status on behalf of “all persons who listed properties on a Multiple Listing Service in the United States using a listing agent or broker affiliated with” the corporate defendants and who paid a buyer broker commission from Oct. 31, 2019, until the present.

Several other defendants have settled the Gibson case, including Compass, Douglas Elliman, The Real Brokerage, @properties, Redfin, Realty ONE Group, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, United Real Estate, NextHome, the Keyes Company, John L. Scott Real Estate Affiliates, The K Company Realty, Real Estate One and Baird & Warner.

Bough has granted preliminary approval to those deals and a final approval hearing for the deals is scheduled on June 24 at 1:30 p.m. Central.

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Representatives from eXp and Weichert will be deposed next week as the real estate companies attempt to fight off allegations that they negotiated a “sweetheart deal” to resolve commission-related antitrust claims against them nationwide.

On Feb. 21, attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a case known as Gibson informed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri that on March 5 and 7, respectively, they will take videotaped depositions of the designated representatives of Weichert and eXp “best able to testify” under oath regarding settlement negotiations in a separate, but similar, commission suit known as Hooper.

“eXp has a duty to designate one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons with knowledge to testify fully regarding the topics listed in Exhibit 1,” one of the filings reads.

“eXp must also promptly confer in good faith about the matters for examination. The deposition(s) will be taken before a Notary Public or some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths for use at trial.”

Both Weichert and eXp attempted to reach settlements in the Gibson case last year, but negotiations broke down, and the companies instead mediated nationwide settlements with attorneys for plaintiffs in Hooper, agreeing to pay $8.5 million and $34 million, respectively.

The Missouri court is currently weighing claims by the Gibson plaintiffs that eXp and Weichert engaged in a “reverse auction,” or a legal strategy in which a defendant negotiates a settlement with attorneys who are willing to accept settlement amounts less than attorneys in a separate case.

In a statement, eXp spokesperson Noor Marzook told Inman, “[W]e remain focused on securing approval of our settlement of the seller-side commission cases and confident the Georgia judge overseeing the Hooper case will find the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.” The company declined to say who would testify at the deposition on eXp’s behalf.

Inman has reached out to Weichert for comment and will update this story if and when a response is received.

According to Friday’s legal filings, the representatives of the companies will be asked to cover these nine topics:

• Communications between eXp/Weichert and any mediator used or considered in connection with any settlement negotiations in the Hooper case.
• Communications between eXp/Weichert and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case, including but not limited to all substantive settlement communications, scheduling communications, mediation statements, financial documents, and draft and final settlement agreements.
• Communications between eXp and Weichert regarding any settlement negotiations or agreements in the Hooper case.
• Any documents provided to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case in advance of mediation.
• Any binding term sheet executed in the Hooper case.
• The Settlement Agreement executed in the Hooper case, including but not limited to the amount agreed to be paid.
• Any disclosures to any mediator and/or plaintiffs’ counsel in the Hooper case regarding settlement negotiations actually conducted or that might be conducted with plaintiffs’ counsel in the Gibson case, Umpa case, or any other case alleging an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Settlement communications with plaintiffs’ counsel in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce, or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.
• Communications with any mediator in any case, other than Hooper, that alleges an anti-competitive agreement to adopt, enforce or maintain a rule requiring cooperative compensation offers on a listing service.

Separately, on Monday, Feb. 24, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied motions to compel arbitration and stay the case filed by two other defendants in the case, William Raveis Real Estate and Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), the parent company of HomeServices of America. The companies had asked that members of the purported class for Gibson be forced to abide by arbitration agreements they signed as homesellers.

Bough rejected the motions because the Gibson case has not yet received class certification and “absent class members are not parties to a case until a class is certified,” so they are not yet subject to the court’s jurisdiction.

More significantly, however, Bough noted that neither BHE or Raveis had signed such agreements themselves. Rather, homesellers had signed them with the companies’ affiliates.

“As this Court and the Eighth Circuit have previously held, nonparties cannot enforce contracts and therefore cannot compel arbitration,” Bough wrote.

The Gibson suit was the first antitrust commission suit filed after an October 2023 jury verdict in the Sitzer | Burnett case awarded billions to a class of homeseller plaintiffs in Missouri.

Like Sitzer | Burnett, the Gibson suit challenges a now-defunct National Association of Realtors rule requiring listing brokers to offer compensation to buyer brokers in order to submit a listing to a multiple listing service, which the plaintiffs allege violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

But the Gibson suit’s scope is potentially much bigger than that of its predecessor: Gibson seeks class-action status on behalf of “all persons who listed properties on a Multiple Listing Service in the United States using a listing agent or broker affiliated with” the corporate defendants and who paid a buyer broker commission from Oct. 31, 2019, until the present.

Several other defendants have settled the Gibson case, including Compass, Douglas Elliman, The Real Brokerage, @properties, Redfin, Realty ONE Group, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, United Real Estate, NextHome, the Keyes Company, John L. Scott Real Estate Affiliates, The K Company Realty, Real Estate One and Baird & Warner.

Bough has granted preliminary approval to those deals and a final approval hearing for the deals is scheduled on June 24 at 1:30 p.m. Central.

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Losses at Offerpad Solutions Inc. mounted in the final quarter of 2024 as the iBuyer bought and sold fewer homes than it did in Q3 — and made a smaller profit on each home sold — the company reported Monday.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR FEBRUARY

But executives at Tempe, Arizona-based Offerpad say they’ve “taken big steps toward profitability” and are preparing for an expected increase in market activity by strategically expanding Offerpad’s “buy box” in order to acquire pricier homes in selected markets.

Offerpad reported a $17.3 million Q4 2024 net loss Monday, up 28 percent from the previous quarter, as homes acquired dipped 9 percent to 384, and homes sold fell 18 percent to 503.

The gross profit on each home sold was also down 24 percent to $21,100.

Offerpad CEO Brian Bair put a positive spin on the year as a whole, highlighting Offerpad’s growing Renovate business, which generated $18 million in 2024 revenue, and improved advertising efficiencies as nearly one-third of acquisitions came through the company’s Agent Partnership Program.

Offerpad launched its “Powered by Offerpad” portal in Q2 for agents and agent teams who are part of the company’s Pro and Max agent programs. Offerpad pays agents a 3 percent referral fee on Offerpad cash sales and a listing fee of up to 1 percent on Offerpad-owned homes. Integration with Realtor.com allows homeowners in select markets to request an instant estimated cash offer through Realtor.com’s Seller’s Marketplace.

“We’ve made tremendous product improvements as we’ve remained focused on delivering real estate solutions for consumers and partners while making progress toward building a long-term, sustainable business,” Bair said in a statement.

At $62.2 million, Offerpad’s 2024 net loss was down 47 percent from the year before, when the company finished $117 million in the red. Operating expenses for the year were down 32 percent, to $118 million, aided in part by layoffs.

Offerpad Chief Financial Officer Peter Knag said that thanks to a “relentless focus on cost efficiency,” Offerpad has “taken big steps towards profitability.”

During Q1 2025, Offerpad expects to sell between 450 and 500 homes and generate $150 million to $170 million in revenue.

After posting an $11.5 million adjusted loss in Q4 2024, Offerpad expects that its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) for Q1 2025 will be “slightly better.”

Shares in Offerpad, which in the last 12 months have traded for as little as $2.08 and as much as $9.30, fell 5 percent in after-hours trading following Monday’s earnings announcement.

Email Matt Carter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Losses at Offerpad Solutions Inc. mounted in the final quarter of 2024 as the iBuyer bought and sold fewer homes than it did in Q3 — and made a smaller profit on each home sold — the company reported Monday.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR FEBRUARY

But executives at Tempe, Arizona-based Offerpad say they’ve “taken big steps toward profitability” and are preparing for an expected increase in market activity by strategically expanding Offerpad’s “buy box” in order to acquire pricier homes in selected markets.

Offerpad reported a $17.3 million Q4 2024 net loss Monday, up 28 percent from the previous quarter, as homes acquired dipped 9 percent to 384, and homes sold fell 18 percent to 503.

The gross profit on each home sold was also down 24 percent to $21,100.

Offerpad CEO Brian Bair put a positive spin on the year as a whole, highlighting Offerpad’s growing Renovate business, which generated $18 million in 2024 revenue, and improved advertising efficiencies as nearly one-third of acquisitions came through the company’s Agent Partnership Program.

Offerpad launched its “Powered by Offerpad” portal in Q2 for agents and agent teams who are part of the company’s Pro and Max agent programs. Offerpad pays agents a 3 percent referral fee on Offerpad cash sales and a listing fee of up to 1 percent on Offerpad-owned homes. Integration with Realtor.com allows homeowners in select markets to request an instant estimated cash offer through Realtor.com’s Seller’s Marketplace.

“We’ve made tremendous product improvements as we’ve remained focused on delivering real estate solutions for consumers and partners while making progress toward building a long-term, sustainable business,” Bair said in a statement.

At $62.2 million, Offerpad’s 2024 net loss was down 47 percent from the year before, when the company finished $117 million in the red. Operating expenses for the year were down 32 percent, to $118 million, aided in part by layoffs.

Offerpad Chief Financial Officer Peter Knag said that thanks to a “relentless focus on cost efficiency,” Offerpad has “taken big steps towards profitability.”

During Q1 2025, Offerpad expects to sell between 450 and 500 homes and generate $150 million to $170 million in revenue.

After posting an $11.5 million adjusted loss in Q4 2024, Offerpad expects that its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) for Q1 2025 will be “slightly better.”

Shares in Offerpad, which in the last 12 months have traded for as little as $2.08 and as much as $9.30, fell 5 percent in after-hours trading following Monday’s earnings announcement.

Email Matt Carter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Losses at Offerpad Solutions Inc. mounted in the final quarter of 2024 as the iBuyer bought and sold fewer homes than it did in Q3 — and made a smaller profit on each home sold — the company reported Monday.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR FEBRUARY

But executives at Tempe, Arizona-based Offerpad say they’ve “taken big steps toward profitability” and are preparing for an expected increase in market activity by strategically expanding Offerpad’s “buy box” in order to acquire pricier homes in selected markets.

Offerpad reported a $17.3 million Q4 2024 net loss Monday, up 28 percent from the previous quarter, as homes acquired dipped 9 percent to 384, and homes sold fell 18 percent to 503.

The gross profit on each home sold was also down 24 percent to $21,100.

Offerpad CEO Brian Bair put a positive spin on the year as a whole, highlighting Offerpad’s growing Renovate business, which generated $18 million in 2024 revenue, and improved advertising efficiencies as nearly one-third of acquisitions came through the company’s Agent Partnership Program.

Offerpad launched its “Powered by Offerpad” portal in Q2 for agents and agent teams who are part of the company’s Pro and Max agent programs. Offerpad pays agents a 3 percent referral fee on Offerpad cash sales and a listing fee of up to 1 percent on Offerpad-owned homes. Integration with Realtor.com allows homeowners in select markets to request an instant estimated cash offer through Realtor.com’s Seller’s Marketplace.

“We’ve made tremendous product improvements as we’ve remained focused on delivering real estate solutions for consumers and partners while making progress toward building a long-term, sustainable business,” Bair said in a statement.

At $62.2 million, Offerpad’s 2024 net loss was down 47 percent from the year before, when the company finished $117 million in the red. Operating expenses for the year were down 32 percent, to $118 million, aided in part by layoffs.

Offerpad Chief Financial Officer Peter Knag said that thanks to a “relentless focus on cost efficiency,” Offerpad has “taken big steps towards profitability.”

During Q1 2025, Offerpad expects to sell between 450 and 500 homes and generate $150 million to $170 million in revenue.

After posting an $11.5 million adjusted loss in Q4 2024, Offerpad expects that its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) for Q1 2025 will be “slightly better.”

Shares in Offerpad, which in the last 12 months have traded for as little as $2.08 and as much as $9.30, fell 5 percent in after-hours trading following Monday’s earnings announcement.

Email Matt Carter

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Kevin Van Eck is stepping away from his brokerage leadership role at @properties Christie’s International Real Estate to become a principal at Maverix Advisory Group, a fledgling industry consulting company, Inman has learned.

Maverix was launched by Jeff Kennedy, a longtime industry player who most recently served as vice president of sales and partnerships for Leading Real Estate Companies of the World (LeadingRE). His new firm’s intent is to guide executives and real estate entrepreneurs on go-to-market strategies, product direction and relationship building, among other advisory services.

Kennedy said in the release he was thrilled to have Van Eck decide to join him.

“His ability to identify and implement technology fills an immediate need in proptech right now,” Kennedy said. “With his expertise, we’re further strengthening our ability to support companies in refining their strategies and accelerating industry-wide adoption.”

Van Eck was previously president of affiliate strategy for @properties Christie’s International Real Estate with an emphasis on marketing and technology integration, agent performance enhancement, and recruitment and retention.

He is moving on not long after his company was acquired by Compass in December for $444 million, Inman reported. The deal is being finalized and, if approved, would merge the No. 1 brokerage by sales volume with the nation’s No. 8 brokerage by volume. Compass said that it would pay $150 million in cash plus $294 million in stock, or 44 million Compass shares.

Maverix said that Van Eck’s tenure in technology scaling success, empowering agents to adapt and demonstrate value, will be transformative for the companies it serves.

“I’m extremely grateful for my experience and the exceptional team at @properties and Christie’s International Real Estate,” said Van Eck in the release. “Joining Maverix Advisory Group presents an exciting opportunity to leverage that expertise, and support proptech companies as they build and scale solutions that drive meaningful impact in the industry.”

Email Craig Rowe

Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.

Kevin Van Eck is stepping away from his brokerage leadership role at @properties Christie’s International Real Estate to become a principal at Maverix Advisory Group, a fledgling industry consulting company, Inman has learned.

Maverix was launched by Jeff Kennedy, a longtime industry player who most recently served as vice president of sales and partnerships for Leading Real Estate Companies of the World (LeadingRE). His new firm’s intent is to guide executives and real estate entrepreneurs on go-to-market strategies, product direction and relationship building, among other advisory services.

Kennedy said in the release he was thrilled to have Van Eck decide to join him.

“His ability to identify and implement technology fills an immediate need in proptech right now,” Kennedy said. “With his expertise, we’re further strengthening our ability to support companies in refining their strategies and accelerating industry-wide adoption.”

Van Eck was previously president of affiliate strategy for @properties Christie’s International Real Estate with an emphasis on marketing and technology integration, agent performance enhancement, and recruitment and retention.

He is moving on not long after his company was acquired by Compass in December for $444 million, Inman reported. The deal is being finalized and, if approved, would merge the No. 1 brokerage by sales volume with the nation’s No. 8 brokerage by volume. Compass said that it would pay $150 million in cash plus $294 million in stock, or 44 million Compass shares.

Maverix said that Van Eck’s tenure in technology scaling success, empowering agents to adapt and demonstrate value, will be transformative for the companies it serves.

“I’m extremely grateful for my experience and the exceptional team at @properties and Christie’s International Real Estate,” said Van Eck in the release. “Joining Maverix Advisory Group presents an exciting opportunity to leverage that expertise, and support proptech companies as they build and scale solutions that drive meaningful impact in the industry.”

Email Craig Rowe