End in sight? MLS PIN, Nosalek plaintiffs ask for final approval of settlement

“If approved, the proposed Settlement will resolve this antitrust case against MLS PIN at least as favorably as a litigated judgment given MLS PIN’s small size and the expected resolution of Plaintiffs’ claims against the other Defendants based on nationwide settlements,” the memorandum in support of the final approval motion states. 

The fourth amended settlement was granted preliminary approval by Judge Patti B. Saris in early June. This was the second time Saris granted preliminary approval to a settlement negotiated between MLS PIN and the Nosalek plaintiffs.

She granted preliminary approval to their original agreement in September 2023 only to have the Department of Justice (DOJ) file an amicus brief just weeks later stating that it had “significant concerns” about the settlement.

Unlike other commission lawsuit settlement agreements — like the one negotiated by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) in the Sitzer/Burnett suit — MLS PIN’s original settlement did not ban offers of buyer broker compensation from the platform.

In later filings in the Nosalek suit, the DOJ argued that it did not want upfront offers of buyer broker compensation displayed or shared anywhere. 

MLS PIN and the Nosalek plaintiffs have spent the past 20 months going back and forth over the settlement. This all changed at the end of May when the DOJ notified the court that it had  officially withdrawn its objections to the settlement. 

The DOJ changed its tune after MLS PIN agreed to remove upfront offers of buyer broker compensation from the site, bringing its settlement in line with NAR’s. Additionally, MLS PIN has agreed to pay $3.95 million, the same amount it would have paid had it bought into NAR’s settlement. 

Of the $3.95 million, the plaintiffs and their counsel are asking for $1.3 million to be used to cover attorneys fees, $200,000 for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs’ attorneys and an additional $5,000 to each of the three named plaintiffs. 

According to a declaration by Christopher L. Lebsock, a partner at Hausfeld, LLP, one of the two firms that represented the plaintiffs’ class, the attorneys “litigated this case in the face of vigorous opposition by experienced counsel. This has required the investment of a significant amount of attorney time, which Hausfeld LLP has expended on a wholly contingent basis.”

The hourly rate for attorneys and paralegals at Hausfeld LLP and Izard Kindall & Raabe LLP range from $180 for paralegals to $1,400 for Scott Martin, a partner at Hausfeld.

In total, the legal teams worked on the case for roughly 7,877 hours at a total cost of $5 million — $1 million more than the settlement amount. Additionally, the teams recorded more than $365,000 in expenses. The largest expense was the $330,000 used to compensate experts involved in the creation of the settlement agreement terms. 

Due to the related nature of the commission lawsuits, the Sitzer/Burnett counsel agreed to allocate the Nosalek class counsel $3.56 million from the Sitzer/Burnett counsel’s fee awarded through the settlement agreements negotiated in that suit. And the Sitzer/Burnett counsel will reimburse the Nosalek counsel for up to $337,457.40 in additional expenses.

But because the largest expense was for experts involved in a settlement related only to the Nosalek suit, the attorneys do not wish to take the full amount from the Sitzer/Burnett counsel. 

The agreement has already received a handful of objections — including from disgruntled settlement class members who will only receive about $30 each, after claiming to have paid roughly $15,000 in elevated buyer’s agent fees.