Editor’s note: The COURT REPORT is RISMedia’s weekly look at current and upcoming lawsuits, investigations and other legal developments around real estate.
Outside of the realm of the ever-trending commission lawsuits in the industry, other legal conflicts continue to arise and develop in the real estate sphere.
Here’s a look at what legal news developed this past week in real estate:
CoStar and Realtor.com® data-theft lawsuit continues to develop
Move, Inc.’s (Realtor.com’s parent company) data-theft lawsuit against CoStar Group in the U.S. District Court in California saw multiple developments as of late.
CoStar asked a judge for an order for expedited discovery in its continuing legal conflict with Move on July 23, and Move responded with its own filing asking Judge George H. Wu to deny the request the following day.
Move’s filing claims that CoStar’s request “fails to identify any specific information they need to oppose the motion, let alone any legal basis or authority to support such a request.”
As RISMedia reported, the expedited discovery issue filings follows Move seeking an injunction to prevent CoStar from using what Move claims is “improperly accessed proprietary information” by a former employee.
In addition, the aforementioned former employee at the center of the case was placed on paid leave by CoStar. James Kaminsky is a CoStar employee formerly employed by Move, who Move claims improperly accessed proprietary information.
Kaminsky denies any wrongdoing, stating that the act of “deleting my personal files, emails and browser history is basic privacy hygiene,” and that any files he copied from Move were “for the singular purpose of helping him build the resume and portfolio needed for a job search.” He also denies he was hired by CoStar to compete with Move, and that his job responsibilities at the companies are different.
Top Agent Network case to move forward
Top Agent Network (TAN) v. National Association of REALTORS® et al—the pocket listing company that focuses on NAR’s “clear cooperation” policy, and was previously dismissed—has been cleared to proceed by a judge.
Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California stated in his judgment that TAN “was possibly harmed by Clear Cooperation based on a different view of the relevant markets—looking at real estate services rather than the housing market in general.”
“Top Agent Network has also adequately alleged antitrust injury,” Chhabria continued.
As RISMedia reported, the case has implications beyond the ongoing commission lawsuits and settlements, as those cases have focused on NAR’s “participation rule” requiring mandatory offers of compensation to buyer agents, rather than Clear Cooperation.
In a recent hearing for this revived case, NAR attorney Ethan Glass stated that the organization “needed time to decide if it was ‘amenable’ to repealing or amending the Clear Cooperation policy.”
“So to be completely candid, the National Association of REALTORS® has been very, very busy with a number of other lawsuits and investigations. And so one of the reasons why it made so much sense to dismiss PLS without prejudice was to give the time for NAR to be able to give the focus to Clear Cooperation that (the pocket listing company) wanted,” Glass said.
