Despite negotiating a settlement agreement, eXp World Holdings’ commission lawsuit challenges persist. On Thursday, Judge Stephen R. Bough, who is overseeing the Gibson suit, denied eXp’s motion to stay the case pending approval of the settlement the firm negotiated with the Hooper commission lawsuit (formerly Phillips) plaintiffs in Georgia.
In his ruling, Bough describes a stay as “extraordinary relief such that the requesting party ‘must make out a clear case of hardship or inequity in being required to go forward.’”
In its motion, eXp argued that the stay was warranted because the plaintiffs in the Gibson suit would not be prejudiced by a stay, since the court has not yet ruled on eXp’s motion to dismiss the case. On the other hand, the Gibson plaintiffs claim that the “settlement in the Hooper case does not provide adequate and fair value for the class given eXp’s financial resources.” Additionally, they claim that eXp conduced a “reverse auction” in order to get the best financial terms for a settlement.
In looking at the arguments, Bough wrote that eXp “failed to ‘make out a clear case of hardship or inequity in being required to go forward.’” Based on eXp’s argument that the stay would help all parties “persevere resources,” he wrote that he could not conclude that “the request summarily outweighs all other factors considered to grant this extraordinary relief.”
In addition to denying the stay, Bough also wrote that he feels the Gibson plaintiffs raised “genuine issues of potentially questionable behavior regarding eXp’s Hooper settlement,” which he says warrants further discovery in the Gibson suit.
“Given the alleged lack of financial considerations and quick settlement in the later-filed Hooper case, granting a stay would not serve in the best interests of justice due to the possible irreparable harm resulting from Plaintiffs’ claims in this case being estopped due to a binding, underfunded class settlement in Hooper,” Bough wrote.
“This is evidenced by eXp’s statement that ‘the proposed class settlement with the Hooper Plaintiffs will cover claims that are substantially similar to the class asserted in the present matter,’ and therefore ‘Hooper Plaintiffs subsume the class definition.’”
While the ruling was related to eXp’s filing, Bough also mentioned Weichert Realtors, which also recently negotiated a proposed settlement agreement with the Hooper plaintiffs. In his ruling, Bough ordered Weichert to also engage in “discovery regarding the timing and circumstances” of its settlement “with all documents produced for in camera review and opposing counsel under seal.”
In a email statement to HousingWire, an eXp spokesperson noted that the firm unsuccessfully mediated with the Gibson plaintiffs in April 2024.
“Separately, and nearly six months later, eXp mediated with the Hooper plaintiffs and reached a settlement that we are confident will be found to be fair, reasonable and adequate and was not a product of any so-called reverse auction,” the spokesperson wrote.
