Gibson commission lawsuit settlements face objections

"While Mullis notes that the settling parties have acknowledged that homebuyer damages claims do not arise out of or relate to the factual predicate of the claims currently pending before this Court, and thus cannot be released, the filing states that he is objecting in an abundance of caution because Hanna might later argue that the release language precludes the homebuyer claims."

"If the court clarifies that the settlement does not affect the homebuyer commission lawsuit claims, Mullis states that he has no objection to the settlement. However, if the release does cover homebuyers' damages claims, then he argues that the court should reject the settlement as inequitable and lack adequate representation. Mullis had previously made these claims regarding settlements in the Sitzer/Burnett and Moehrl suits, but his objections were overruled."

Mullis believes the settlement release does not cover class members' claims to recover damages from separate home purchases. He notes that the settling parties acknowledged homebuyer damages claims do not arise from the factual predicate of the claims currently pending before the Court and therefore cannot be released. He objects as a precaution because Hanna might later argue the release language precludes homebuyer claims. Mullis will withdraw his objection if the court clarifies the settlement does not affect homebuyer commission lawsuit claims. He urges rejection of the settlement if the release does cover those damages claims, citing inequity and inadequate representation.

Read at www.housingwire.com