T
he Sitzer/Burnett case, which led to a $1 billion settlement between brokerages and home sellers, is still facing challenges. An appeals court is reviewing objections that could potentially invalidate the deal. Key points include:

    A law professor's brief argues that plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue industry changes. If the appeals court agrees, the settlement may be tossed out, returning the industry to its pre-settlement state.

    Other objections have been filed with the court, which will accept briefs until July 21. A hearing and decision could follow next year. Despite some in the real estate industry moving on from commissions litigation, ongoing court battles over settlements still pose a threat.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is reviewing the Sitzer/Burnett settlement and others reached between brokerages and home sellers. Law professor Tanya Monestier has filed a brief arguing that damages were too low and attorney fees too high. She also claims that past home sellers should not be able to pursue practice changes since they weren't at risk of future harm.

    Monestier's argument could invalidate the settlement in its entirety, sending the industry back to where it was before the deal. Industry observer Rob Hahn believes this would lead to significant turmoil and uncertainty.

    Other issues presented to the appeals court include allegations that the U.S. District court instructed plaintiffs' counsel to ghostwrite its approval order and required objectors to appear at the settlement hearing in person. Any parties involved have until July 21 to file a brief, with an oral hearing and decision possibly coming early next year.