Commission Case Showdown: Batton Plaintiffs Move To Derail Anywhere Settlement

Two related lawsuits are starting to overlap, and the plaintiffs are trying to clean it up before it gets messy. The Batton homebuyer commission lawsuit plaintiffs are claiming that Anywhere Real Estate conducted a “reverse auction” in choosing to settle with Tuccori plaintiffs instead of the Batton plaintiffs. 

On Tuesday, the plaintiffs in the Batton case asked to step into another lawsuit, Tuccori, after that case moved forward with several proposed settlements, including one with Anywhere. At the same time, the plaintiffs in the Tuccori case asked the court to let them update their lawsuit to add Anywhere as a defendant — even though Anywhere is already being sued in the Batton case for the same alleged conduct.

Because that would mean two lawsuits making the same claims against the same company, the Batton plaintiffs responded Wednesday by asking the court to move the Anywhere-related claims from the Tuccori case over to the judge already handling Batton.

In short: they’re asking the court to put all the claims against Anywhere in one place, so the two Illinois judges can coordinate and decide the cleanest way to handle it — instead of running parallel cases saying the same thing.

According to the Batton plaintiffs, Anywhere began negotiating to opt-in the Tuccori settlement after it was acquired by Compass. Compass is a defendant in the Batton II lawsuit, but is not a defendant in the Tuccori suit. 

In their motion to intervene, the Batton plaintiffs claim that Anywhere picked “the most ineffectual class lawyers to negotiate a settlement with in the hope that the district court will approve a weak settlement that will preclude other claims against the defendant.” 

“The questionable settlement amount here further underscores Plaintiffs’ counsel’s inadequate representation of homebuyer claims against Anywhere,” the filing states. 

While the exact settlement amount is currently under seal, the filing claims that the amount is less than $10.78 million. Those looking to opt-in to the Tuccori settlement must pay at least 25% of what they paid in the Sitzer/Burnett suit, which for Anywhere was $83.5 million. The filing notes that the $20 million Keller Williams paid to settle the homebuyer claims with the Batton plaintiffs was over 28% of what the firm paid in its Sitzer/Burnett settlement. Keller Williams’ settlement received preliminary approval earlier this month. 

The Batton plaintiffs claim that by intervening they are helping to “ensure efficient prosecution of homebuying claims against Anywhere for both the parties and the Court.” As part of these efforts, the Batton plaintiffs are asking the court to not grant preliminary approval to Anywhere’s settlement. 

If the settlement is approved, the Batton plaintiffs warned that they intend to appeal the approval. Additionally, if the motion to intervene in the lawsuit is granted, the Batton plaintiffs said they would file a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent the Tuccori plaintiffs and Anywhere from proceeding with their motion for preliminary approval of Anywhere’s settlement. Despite not receiving a ruling on their motion to intervene, the Batton plaintiffs filed this motion for preliminary injunction on Wednesday in their own suit.

Additionally, in an entry on the Tuccori suit docket on Wednesday, the Judge overseeing the Tuccori suit, told the Tuccori plaintiffs that it was unlikely that their motion to file an amended complaint would be granted. 

She ordered the counsel for the Tuccori plaintiffs to appear in person at a hearing on March 4, where he will be asked to explain why he did not disclose this information as he is required to by law. 

“He also must be prepared to address the matters raised by the substance of the motion to intervene,” Judge Jenkins wrote. 

This is not the first time plaintiffs in a commission lawsuit have taken issue with defendants choosing to settle the claims via one of the copycat lawsuits that proliferated after the Sitzer/Burnett verdict in October 2023. In October of 2024, the Gibson homebuyer commission lawsuit plaintiffs sought to intervene in the Hooper suit after they claimed eXp World Holdings’ settlement with the Hooper plaintiffs was a “sweetheart deal.”

In March 2025, the Gibson plaintiffs were blocked from intervening in that lawsuit. However, Judge Stepehen Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson lawsuit, has prevented eXp from staying their proceedings in that suit despite their settlement with the Hooper plaintiffs gaining preliminary approval. 

Anywhere did not return HousingWire’s request for comment.