Editor’s note: The COURT REPORT is RISMedia’s weekly look at current and upcoming lawsuits, investigations and other legal developments around real estate.
New Sitzer/Burnett evidence rejected
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit court has rejected any new evidence introduced in the appeal process of the National Association of Realtors®’ (NAR) settlement.
Throughout the appeals process, NAR and other brokerage defendants—as well as plaintiffs—have submitted new evidence in the form of references to other similar ongoing cases, or copycats that have been settled. With this ruling, this material must now be removed from briefs, with the resubmission deadline of today.
Settlement appeals have yet to be ruled on, and rulings may be pushed back now due to the refiling of briefs.
University of Buffalo law professor and settlement naysayer Tanya Monestier called the ruling a “critical” win in a LinkedIn post. She has previously “opposed the appellees’ motion to supplement the record and moved to strike any references to the declarations,” a sentiment the court agreed with in this ruling. Monestier herself is appealing the settlement approval, representing herself as a class member.
Several developments in Lutz v. HomeServices
Defendants in the homebuyer commission lawsuit Lutz v. HomeServices of America have filed two motions: a stay in discovery and a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs third amended complaint.
The lawsuit was previously ordered closed in July with the dismissal of the plaintiffs second amended complaint, but was reopened Aug. 15 when plaintiffs updated their arguments.
Defendants have now filed a motion to dismiss this third amended complaint and once again close the lawsuit. The filing stated that the new complaint again “fails to remedy the fatal deficiencies” that have been identified in previous complaints, such as the federal Sherman Act claim and various state law claims (antitrust, consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims under the laws of more than two dozen states).
In addition, defendants filed to stay discovery for six months or until the motion to dismiss the amended complaint is resolved, whichever occurs first. Plaintiffs stated in the filing they do not oppose the motion, with a stipulation that they do not endorse the defendants sentiments on their motion’s “likelihood of success.”
Texas broker seeks injunction to waive NAR dues
Texas broker Luz de Amor Eytalis is seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against NAR to prevent the enforcement of mandatory dues policies as an appeal of a previous court order is pending.
According to her lawsuit, on June 5, 2024 Eytalis was issued an invoice from WFAR for $1,754.26 for one agent with inactive status.
In August 2023, WFAR issued an invoice for $3,496.53 for dues related to inactive agents, which she paid to avoid termination, according to a court filing.
Eytalis claimed in the filing that NAR’s policies are causing “irreparable harm by threatening (Eytalis’) membership and Multiple Listing Service (MLS) access.”
Previously, a federal judge dismissed Eytalis’ lawsuit, along with another Pennsylvania-based broker who had made similar claims.
