Another broker lawsuit targeting MLS access rules and the National Association of Realtors®’ (NAR) “three-way agreement” was dismissed by an appellate court on Sept. 9, as challenges to these long-standing policies and structures have so far failed to advance in courthouses across the country.
Lou Eytalis, a Texas broker who decried membership feeds and restrictions enforced by state, local and the national Realtor® organizations, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Her lawsuit, filed in 2024, described association membership requirements for MLS access as “an anti-competitive monopoly.”
In a short opinion, a panel of three judges on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that “conclusory facts” in the original lawsuit “are insufficient to state an antitrust injury,” also dismissing Eytalis’ argument that the lower court abused its discretion in declining to address state law claims.
“We are pleased that the Court dismissed the appeal,” an NAR spokesperson told RISMedia via email. “NAR membership is voluntary, and the integrated structure connecting local, state, and national associations remains lawful and essential to the value we provide our members.”
Eytalis was one of a handful of brokers that brought similar claims all across the country, varying significantly in specifics but all protesting NAR’s multi-tiered membership requirements—and dues they had to pay to three associations.
NAR has continued to defend the three-way agreement specifically, but stepped back from MLS policymaking in 2025, specifically removing language saying that it is “committed to the principle that association membership is a reasonable condition of participation in the association’s multiple listing service.”
Almost all of those lawsuits have been dismissed or dropped, even as a few—like Eytalis did—push forward with appeals.
The lawsuit
Eytalis said in her lawsuit that she was billed around $5,000 in 2023 and 2024 by her local Realtor® association for agents who were inactive. She disputed these fees unsuccessfully, eventually filing the lawsuit, representing herself rather than hiring a lawyer.
Her claims were dismissed in the summer of 2025, with a judge ruling she had failed to show antitrust injury to a market (instead focusing on her own injuries), but Eytalis appealed in December.
Eytalis still has the option to ask for a rehearing from the appellate court.
Another broker lawsuit is also currently in the appeals process, as the Sixth Circuit is considering the petition of Michigan-based brokers who made similar claims (also dismissed by a lower court).
