A
ttorneys for the Hooper plaintiffs fired back at their Gibson counterparts, accusing them of trying to "torpedo" legitimate deals and line their own pockets with more attorneys' fees. The March 6 filing challenged the self-serving accusations, suggesting that the Gibson lawyers are motivated by greed rather than a genuine concern about the legitimacy of the settlements.

    The Hooper deal has been under scrutiny for nearly six months since eXp announced its $34 million settlement in October. Plaintiffs in another commissions case, Gibson/Umpa, objected to the deal, calling it an "improper sweetheart deal." However, the Hooper attorneys argue that their deal is actually better for home sellers and provide math to support this claim.

    The Hooper filing also questions whether eXp and Weichert shopped around for a convenient place to make a "sweetheart deal" to settle commissions lawsuits. The plaintiffs' attorneys in Hooper suggest that multiple class actions would never be able to settle if all deals in related cases were dubbed reverse auctions, which is considered unethical.

    The Hooper filing claims that the deals reached in their case are better for sellers and provide more details about the negotiations. For example, the $34 million deal eXp made in Hooper, minus 20% attorneys' fees, would net $27.2 million for the class, compared to a potential settlement of $40 million in the Gibson case that would net $26.7 million.

    The judge in the Hooper case will decide whether or not to grant preliminary approval to the eXp and Weichert deals, along with settlements made by Mark Spain Real Estate and Atlanta Communities Real Estate Brokerage, which were not challenged by the Gibson attorneys.