The various parties ended up settling the case, also known colloquially as Sitzer/Burnett, including NAR in March for $418 million. (The NAR agreement is not a part of the hearing tomorrow.) Homeservices of America, which is no longer a defendant in the Batton matter having been removed by the court in February, was the most recent to enter into a settlement agreement in a related proceeding. 

The motion for the injunction was filed earlier today, citing the closeness of the Burnett hearing after the defendants released certain details of the settlement, including their intent to release homebuyers' claims.

This filing claimed "The Proposed Order, if entered, will irreparably harm homebuyer Plaintiffs and putative class members who both bought and sold homes in two ways: (1) it improperly enjoins them from continuing to litigate their claims in this case before this Court; and (2) releases their claims without additional compensation, let alone adequate notice and representation for the unique claims held by homebuyers."

But in denying the motion, Judge Andrea Wood noted these plaintiffs had filed objections to the Burnett settlement and will have their opportunity to be heard in court on May 9.

The reason for that hearing is for the district court to consider and address challenges to the fairness of the proposed settlement, Judge Wood wrote.

"Moreover, although Plaintiffs characterize their requested injunction as enjoining action by the specified Defendants, Plaintiffs' goal is to prevent the fairness hearing duly set by the Burnett court from going forward according to that court's orders," the ruling continued. "Such extraordinary action would be inappropriate."

Judge Wood cited a Seventh Circuit ruling that "[i]t is particularly rare for a federal court to enjoin litigation in another federal court."

The attorneys for the Batton plaintiffs have the opportunity to express their objections to the Burnett settlement in that forum, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri in Kansas City.

'This Court will continue to "operate on the basis of the assumption that all federal judges follow the law and protect the rights of the class members in accordance with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,'" Judge Wood ruled.