A federal judge handed the National Association of Realtors (NAR) a major legal win today, throwing out a lawsuit by two brokers and an agent in Michigan, who had claimed that rules restricting MLS access violated federal and state antitrust laws.
Douglas Hardy, Glenn Champion and Dylan Trent filed the lawsuit all the way back in August of 2024, alleging that local and state boards of Realtors, along with NAR and the local MLS, RealComp II, all conspired to create rules and form an illegal monopoly, forcing real estate professionals to pay dues to access the MLS.
That litigation set off a scattering of similar lawsuits by brokers across the country, some of which have also been dismissed.
In his ruling, Judge Jonathan Grey of the Eastern District of Michigan wrote that at least some of the plaintiffs’ claims regarding the MLS are “misleading and contradicted by reality,” and the allegations that MLS membership is mandatory are “insufficient to support a viable claim under (federal antitrust law).”
The ruling comes as industry focus shifts from the commission lawsuits (which the Michigan plaintiffs cited as at least part of their reason for filing their claims) to private listings and portal partnerships that at least some real estate insiders worry could undermine the MLS.
NAR did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Grey also dismissed claims that Realtor associations conspired to force membership without addressing the specific allegations, writing that since plaintiffs had failed to articulate an “actionable” harm created by the alleged wrongdoing, that claim was not “viable.”
Additionally, Grey noted that the MLS information in question can be accessed without MLS or Realtor membership. And “contrary to plaintiffs’ representations,” Grey said there is a long history of federal and state courts explicitly ruling that Realtor® membership requirements for MLS access are not inherently illegal.
He rejected a comparison to a landmark 1991 case in which an appeals court made the MLS membership requirement illegal in three states, saying that the specific circumstances were very different.
“(T)here is no…violation simply because a voluntary trade organization requires membership to access MLS,” he wrote.
Plaintiffs in the case could not immediately be reached for comment.
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to RISMedia for updates.
