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.