A
law professor has challenged the court's authority to force objectors to attend a settlement hearing in person, while another case involving Howard Hanna is being appealed in Pennsylvania. The National Association of Realtors' final settlement hearing is just weeks away, but a dispute over objectors has emerged.

    Tanya Monestier, a law professor and consumer advocate, has filed a motion asking the court to reconsider its order requiring objectors to attend the hearing in person. This comes after US District Court Judge Stephen Bough issued an order stating that objectors must be present for NAR's final settlement hearing to ensure due process is satisfied.

    Monestier argues that the court lacks the authority to compel in-person attendance, citing a class notice that assured members their voices would be heard if they filed written objections on time. She claims this requirement is an abuse of the Court's authority and will violate class members' due process rights.

    Meanwhile, Howard Hanna may not be off the hook in Pennsylvania after plaintiffs Danielle and Jessie Kay, John and Nancy Moratis, Kaitlyn Slavic and Maria Iannome appealed the dismissal of defendants Howard Hanna and West Penn MLS. The appeal was sent to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on November 8.

    In a separate case, Judge William Stickman IV dismissed Howard Hanna and West Penn from the case last month, citing their argument that there was no agreement between them. However, this differs from cases naming NAR as a defendant, where listing brokers were required to offer some amount of compensation to buyer brokers.