The time has come – the time to take charge. This summer, July 30-August 1, 2024, experience the complete reinvention of the most important event in real estate at Inman Connect in Las Vegas. Join your peers and the best in the industry to shape the future. learn more.
Lawyers won settlements from major real estate franchisees Anywhere, Keller Williams and RE/MAX in the antitrust commission lawsuit known as Sitzer. Burnett and Mohr are seeking huge damages in federal court: $82 million.
On February 29, attorneys from three law firms representing Sitzer | The Burnett plaintiffs — Williams Dirks Dameron, Boulware Law and Ketchmark & McCreight — filed a sports Attorney fees and costs were filed in the Western District Court of Missouri on behalf of his company and eight law firms involved in the Moehrl case: Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, Susman Godfrey, Handley Farah & Anderson, Teske Law, Justice Catalyst Law, Wright Marsh & Levy and Gustafson Gluek.
According to the motion, the law firms worked on a contingency basis over more than five years, working a total of nearly 96,500 hours (a total of more than $80 million if the firms were billed at their usual hourly rates) and receiving nearly 13 dollars working hours. As of the date of the Keller Williams settlement, the out-of-pocket costs of filing and prosecuting the two lawsuits were $1 million, none of which has yet to be paid.
They are seeking one-third of the total $208.5 million settlement ($69.5 million), plus out-of-pocket compensation for a total of $82.4 million, or 39.5% of the total settlement.
“Class counsel faces substantial risks on behalf of the Settlement Class,” attorneys wrote in the motion.
“They did so despite the fact that there was no road map or pre-established path to recovery in this case. In fact, the class counsel had no guarantee at all that they would be paid for their work or that their fees would be reimbursed, but were instead working with at least twenty The country’s top defense company. “
Cece | Burnett originally filed the lawsuit in 2019 and was granted class action status in April 2022. Moehrl also filed a lawsuit in 2019 and was awarded a class action lawsuit in March 2023 that named the same defendants.
SITZE | Burnett goes on trial in October. In a historic verdict, a jury on October 31 found that Keller Williams, RE/MAX, Anywhere, the National Association of Realtors, HomeServices of America and two of its subsidiaries, BHH Affiliates and HSF Affiliates, conspired to inflate brokers The commission rate is paid by the home seller. Juries awarded $1.78 billion in damages to approximately 500,000 Missouri homeowners. If the ruling stands, the amount stipulated in the law will triple to more than $5.3 billion.
Anywhere and RE/MAX settled before Sitzer | Burnett trial for $83.5 million and $55 million, respectively. Keller Williams settled on February 1 for $70 million. The settlements have received preliminary approval from the court but have not yet given final approval.
“Class counsel conducted extensive legal work leading to the settlement, including more than 100 motions and responses, such as motions to dismiss, motions to transfer, motions to stay, motions to compel arbitration (and related appeals), class certification, and Rule 23(f) appeal petitions papers, summary judgment motions, Daubert motions, trial motions and more than 180 depositions,” the motion states.
The motion also highlights the law firm’s work on Sitzer | Burnett and Mohr prevented them from pursuing other jobs.
“This is time and money spent and invested on behalf of the Settlement Class that could have been spent on less risky cases where liability or damages are more certain or where the claims were made through prior litigation, government prosecutions or publicly admit that it was proposed,” the motion states.
“Even after a successful trial, the risk remains given the defendant’s alleged inability to pay the judgment, not to mention any risk on appeal.”
Michael Kagemak
Sitzer | Burnett’s plaintiffs emphasized the “enormous risk” taken by the law firm, lead attorney Michael Ketchmark said in a phone interview.
“One of the things people don’t look at is that all of these law firms have invested a lot of time and money, and there’s no way we would be in the position we’re in now if the jury ruled against us.” Kejmak told Inman.
“Keller Williams would never have come to the table. Without the looming threat of trial, without RE/MAX and Anywhere’s demonstrably correct belief that things were not going to work out, they would never have settled. That’s because of the lawyers Firms are willing to step up and invest time, money and resources to hold companies like this accountable, and that’s the reality.”
According to Ketchmark, the attorneys’ motion only addresses the amounts the law firm is seeking in connection with the three proposed settlements, not the entire case.
“If additional fees are collected through a judgment or additional settlement, the law allows us to file an application for additional fees,” he said.
According to the motion, awarding attorneys’ fees and costs equal to one-third of the settlement fund has “established precedent” and is considered “common practice.”
“In the Eighth Circuit, fees based on a percentage of funds recovered is the preferred method for calculating attorneys’ fees in temporary representations, including class actions,” the motion states.
“Such fees incentivize attorneys like class counsel to pursue claims for those whose individual claims are too small to justify the costs of litigation. Percent-based awards allow individuals who cannot afford hourly attorney fees to still pursue their claims.
“Percentage-based recoveries also align class counsel’s interests with those of their clients because the greater the recovery class counsel receives, the higher the fees class counsel is entitled to receive.”
The filing stresses that attorneys are not seeking additional fees for the “significant injunctive relief” they receive from the settlement, which includes requiring franchisors not to mandate Realtor membership and to train their agents to know commissions are negotiable. Yes, wait.
Some in the real estate industry objected to law firms demanding “customary” fees when suing NARs and franchisors, who allegedly kept commissions steady between 2.5% and 3%.
But Kejimark said, “There is zero comparability between the two.”
“There’s a difference between a court stepping in and looking at the amount and approving a fee request in that amount, and colluding with a competitor to set your wages,” he said.
“We asked the judge to approve this amount in accordance with the law. We did not require the defendant in this case to agree to pay a commission before trial or to pay a contingency before trial.”
The motion asks the court to award $15,000 to the named plaintiffs to represent the settlement class, or $25,000 if they testify in Sitzer | Burnett Trial. It’s unclear how much the unnamed plaintiffs in the settlement class will receive after their attorneys get their share.
“It’s hard to answer that question in a vacuum because it depends on the extent of court approval, and the next question is how much is left,” Ketchmark said. “The next really important part of the math problem is how many people file claims. That’s how the money is distributed.”
“I anticipate that significant amounts of money will be returned to class members,” Ketchmark added. “Our hope, our belief and our goal is that these are the first three of what will ultimately be many settlements and the collection of this verdict. It will result in the return of significant amounts of money to those who had it wrongly taken from them.” .”
Read the motion:
Send an email to Andrea V. Brambila.
