The Plaintiff Lawyers Respond, Urge Final Approval of the NAR Settlement

But there is a real issue brewing here that neither discusses...

Almost a month ago, I wrote about the objections filed by Tanya Monestier, a law professor at University of Buffalo, who has been very active since the NAR settlement was filed. In that post, I said that I did not think her Objection would carry the day, but that it was valuable to us as an industry to see all of the problems she pointed out.

Well, the plaintiff attorneys have filed a response as a motion and suggestions in support of final approval. It’s a monster filing, some 137 pages in length. It is also incredibly dense and detailed, as the brief goes and answers every single objection filed, not just by Monestier but by every objector.

Predictably, the plaintiff lawyers reject all of the objections and urge the court to approve the settlements. I think the court will do just that.

However, it is worth looking at a few specific items brought up by the plaintiff lawyers here as they are important to think about how this will operate going forward. Plus, I think there is a brewing issue that neither Monesiter nor the plaintiff lawyers have addressed.

As always, I am not your lawyer, and none of this is legal advice. Please consult your own attorney for actual legal advice.