Fifteen MLSs and 13 brokerages that chose to opt-in to NAR’s commission settlement will cough up an additional $30,587,754 in compensation to sellers, raising the settlement fund to nearly $450 million.
Whether it’s refining your business model, mastering new technologies, or discovering strategies to capitalize on the next market surge, Inman Connect New York will prepare you to take bold steps forward. The Next Chapter is about to begin. Be part of it. Join us and thousands of real estate leaders Jan. 22-24, 2025.
The amount of money collected for homesellers through the National Association of Realtors’ proposed settlement is set to grow by more than $30 million.
On Monday, attorneys for homeseller plaintiffs in a major commission-related lawsuit known as Sitzer | Burnett submitted a filing asking the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri to preliminarily approve settlements reached with 15 non-Realtor multiple listing services and 13 large brokerages that chose to opt-in to NAR’s deal in order to release them from antitrust claims.
TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY FOR SEPTEMBER
“Together, these ‘opting in’ MLSs and brokerages have agreed to pay an additional $30,587,754 in compensation to the Class — creating, in connection with the NAR Settlement, a total monetary settlement fund of at least $448,587,754 plus certain interest for the benefit of the Class,” the filing reads.
“Each opt-in entity either paid the amount reflected in the NAR Settlement agreement formula … or an amount that was reached after a review of the entity’s internal financial statements and arms-length negotiations.”
The court granted the motion on Tuesday, Oct. 1.
June 18 was the deadline for Realtor-affiliated and non-Realtor-affiliated MLSs to opt into the NAR deal. Virtually all affiliated MLSs opted in and will have to pay nothing under the terms, unlike non-Realtor MLSs who will have to pay outright under an opt-in formula or enter mediation to determine an amount.
The 15 non-Realtor MLSs agreed to pay $6.2 million combined, according to the filing:
| Alaska MLS | $238,800 |
| BAREIS | $736,800 |
| Central Virginia Regional MLS | $100,000 |
| MetroList | $2,280,100 |
| Minot MLS | $26,300 |
| MiRealSource | $100,000 |
| MLS Exchange | $361,300 |
| Real Estate Information Network (“REIN”) | $934,100 |
| Richmond MLS | $15,700 |
| SE Alaska MLS | $19,000 |
| Southeast Georgia MLS | $16,800 |
| Spanish Peaks MLS | $15,700 |
| UNYREIS | $250,000 |
| West Penn Multi-List | $895,000 |
| WNYREIS | $250,000 |
| TOTAL | $6,239,600 |
This amount is somewhat higher than an Inman review of hundreds of MLSs previously found in June. At the time, about half of broker-owned MLSs had opted in, with some who had opted out stating their rules are different from those that have attracted antitrust litigation. Ten of the MLSs who had opted in chose to fork over at least $5,383,800 total while eight of the opt-in MLSs were still in mediation then.
Because not all of the broker-owned MLSs who opted in are listed in the Sept. 30 filing, there may be other settlements in the offing, including with the Real Estate Board of New York’s RLS, Brooklyn MLS, Central New York Information Service, and Greater Southern MLS.
The 13 brokerages listed in the filing agreed to pay more than $24 million combined with Shorewest Realtors agreeing to pay more than a quarter of the sum, a very precise $6,923,153.89:
| Fathom Holdings, Inc. | $2,950,000 |
| Key Realty, Ltd. | $375,000 |
| Michael Saunders & Company | $1,200,000 |
| Pinnacle Estate Properties, Inc. | $725,000 |
| Rose & Womble Realty Company | $100,000 |
| Brown Harris Stevens | $2,900,000 |
| Shorewest Realtors, Inc | $6,923,153.89 |
| Silvercreek Realty Group | $350,000 |
| The Agency | $3,750,000 |
| Vanguard | $2,000,000 |
| Watson Realty Corp. | $1,350,000 |
| McGraw Davisson Stewart LLC | $800,000 |
| Downing-Frye Realty, Inc. | $925,000 |
| TOTAL | $24,348,154 |
The plaintiffs asked that the court allow the companies opting-in to join the case in order to participate in the settlement and approval process and also that the court reaffirm that the opt-in settlements are preliminarily approved as part of the preliminary approval of NAR’s settlement.
“Plaintiffs’ allegations involve allegations of a nationwide conspiracy and a resulting series of anticompetitive transactions,” the filing reads.
“The allegations made by plaintiffs in various actions share numerous common questions of law and fact with the existing action, including because they allegedly involve the same or similar conduct at issue in the underlying action, and are directly related to approval of the NAR Settlement.”
The law firms for the plaintiffs also requested that the court address the final approval of the opt-in settlements at the same Nov. 26 hearing already set for the final approval of the NAR settlement.
Read the motion (re-load the page if document does not appear):
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to note that the plaintiffs’ motion was granted on Oct. 1.
Email Andrea V. Brambila.
Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter
