A recent lawsuit filed in Louisiana is taking direct aim at the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR), the Louisiana REALTORS® Association and several local groups, alleging antitrust violations, discriminatory practices and restrictive tying arrangements.
The case, filed by four Louisiana agents and brokers, echoes similar concerns about equity and competition within the real estate industry that were previously raised by brokers in Michigan and another broker in Pennsylvania, who have filed separate federal lawsuits over the last several months.
Another case filed last year in Pennsylvania is making similar allegations, while a previously unreported case filed against the New Mexico Association of REALTORS® alleges discrimination and wrongful termination. Altogether, the cases represent an escalation of legal action based on sometimes overlapping claims of discrimination and antitrust violations.
Most, but not all are filed pro se, meaning plaintiffs are representing themselves.
The Louisiana case, filed January 2, claims that mandatory REALTOR® memberships, often required to access critical Multiple Listing Services (MLS) data, constitute anticompetitive practices and unlawful tying arrangements.
“Such practices limit competition, harm consumers, and disproportionately affect all real estate professionals within the real estate industry,” read the court filing. “The defendants impose tying requirements on appraisers, despite there being no legitimate reason for appraisers to be members of these associations to access the MLS data needed to accurately serve the lending industry and protect consumers.”
Led by Carla DeYoung, a real estate broker and certified residential appraiser, all four plaintiffs are required to pay dues and be members of three associations in order to become members of the MLS serving their market area.
Along with NAR, DeYoung is suing the following defendants:
- Louisiana REALTORS® Association (LRA)
- Greater Baton Rouge Association of REALTORS® (GBRAR)
- New Orleans Metropolitan Association of REALTORS®
- Bayou Board of REALTORS®
- Greater Central Louisiana REALTORS® Association
- REALTORS® Association of Acadiana
- ROAM MLS, LLC, a consortium of the above board associations
- Kenneth Daman, the registered agent for ROAM MLS, LLC and executive vice president of the Greater Baton Rouge Association of REALTORS®
Some of the plaintiffs are current members of ROAM MLS and some have canceled their memberships due to concerns regarding potential violations of the law, according to the court filing.
The Board associations require individuals to maintain membership with NAR, LRA and a REALTOR® board within the state of Louisiana to qualify for membership in the MLS that serves the plaintiff’s market area.
ROAM MLS is serviced by a third-party platform, Paragon MLS. The board association controls the data provided to Paragon MLS.
Excluding non-association real estate professionals from accessing the MLS has not only favored certain professionals over others, but has hindered the market, “disproportionately impacting minority consumers and real estate professionals by limiting access to essential data.”
The importance of MLS access is crucial to a broker’s success, as noted in a report by the Federal Trade Commission.
“MLSs are so important to the operation of real estate markets that, as a practical matter, any broker who wishes to compete effectively in a market must participate in the local MLS,” read the report.
It’s also important for “substantially reducing transaction costs,” noted the report.
“Brokers using the MLS reduce the costs of matching buyers and sellers, and can market their service to a large set of potential clients. Further, by stating upfront the compensation being offered to a cooperating broker, the MLS can reduce the costs associated with listing brokers having to negotiate separately with each potential cooperating broker.”
The plaintiffs urge the Court to recognize that MLSs—including those operated by local board associations and those governed by rules mirroring NAR policies—should operate independently from such frameworks “that may perpetuate antitrust violations.”
When asked about MLS access, an NAR spokesperson told RISMedia that each MLS determines its requirements, not NAR.
“NAR does not require that MLS access be limited to NAR members. MLSs are operated at the local level and each MLS determines individual participation requirements,” the spokesperson wrote in an email.
Going beyond the antitrust and tying arrangements, the case alleges reputational damage placed upon the entire real estate industry.
With no shortage of widely publicized scandals surrounding NAR—including sexual harassment allegations, extravagant spending and antitrust violations related to the Participation Rule and Clear Cooperation Policy, outlined the filing—this reputation follows the industry as a whole, alleges the filing.
“The public’s inability to differentiate between REALTORS® and non-REALTORS® ensures that this damage extends to all real estate professionals,” read the filing.
Back to NAR, the plaintiffs further claim that the association’s recent rule changes—such as removing offers of buyer compensation from the MLS and the enforcement of exclusive buyer agreements—establish unfair barriers to market entry and violate the Fair Housing Act by “disproportionately impacting minority communities through restrictive policies.”
By requiring real estate professionals to enforce these new rules, the plaintiffs argue that it makes them carry the entire burden, resulting in harm—including lost business opportunities, reputational damage, emotional stress and financial losses.
Due to a lack of transparency and the unilateral decisions in the Sitzer-Burnett case, specifically, the plaintiffs in this case have experienced “severe emotional distress, including anxiety, frustration and a sense of betrayal.”
Despite this, these agents still need to continue their association memberships, so long as they want to continue using the MLS.
“Real estate agents who choose not to be controlled by association overreach suffer adverse consequences due to the loss of MLS access, significantly hindering their ability to compete effectively in the marketplace,” read the filing.
Ultimately, the plaintiffs seek damages and significant structural changes, including an end to mandatory association memberships for MLS access. If successful, this lawsuit could set a precedent for how MLS systems are governed and pave the way for a more inclusive and competitive real estate industry.
RISMedia reached out to DeYoung, who said that she and the plaintiffs have received overwhelming support from their industry peers since last week’s filing.
“We have received overwhelming backing, not only from our local area, but also from brokers and agents across the country,” she wrote in an email. “Many have reached out to express their gratitude for our actions in providing a voice for the challenges we have all been facing—especially since many of these agents feel unable to publicly express their concerns.”
Although they are not involved in the lawsuit, DeYoung said she has full confidence in the Louisiana Real Estate Commission, whose mission is to serve and protect the public interest in real estate transactions and other real estate-related activities.
“Their willingness to listen to our voices when needed and to stand firm in challenging situations gives us assurance as we move forward.”
Similar lawsuits in Pennsylvania and New Mexico
Two recent cases in Pennsylvania and New Mexico also call out NAR and local associations for antitrust violations regarding MLSs while also detailing alleged first-hand discrimination that was “ignored” by associations.
In a case filed in Pennsylvania Nov. 25, 2024—Preston Moore, who served as the first Black president for the Pennsylvania Association of REALTORS® (PAR)—is suing NAR, PAR and other associated boards, claiming they have engaged in discriminatory practices, particularly in the enforcement of rules that disproportionately affect minority members.
Other organizations included as defendants include the New York REALTOR® Association, the New Jersey REALTORS®, the Pennsylvania Real Estate Commission and the Black Caucus of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
PAR suspended Moore in June 2024, just five months after he was named president of the association, he said. He continues to pay full membership dues, while denied access to full membership benefits, according to the filing.
In the filing, Moore states that he has personally experienced racial bias from both NAR and PAR. He alleges that NAR has failed “to provide due process in the context of harassment allegations, particularly where high-level leaders” are involved. This absence of a thorough investigation for allegations constitutes a denial of fair treatment and due process, he said.
According to the court document, there is evidence that group text messages proving these injustices were intentionally deleted.
This is set to become a class-action lawsuit, as the filing states other individuals are waiting to be added to the complaint.
Aside from suing for discrimination, Moore is suing the defendants for antitrust and monopolistic practices through forced memberships.
NAR’s MLSs force professionals in the industry to become members, stifling competition and limiting market access—“forcing professionals to comply with NAR’s rules and dues without viable alternatives,” read the filing. Further, these forced memberships disproportionately affect minority and lower-income folks who lack the financial means to pay the imposed dues.
The Louisiana and Pennsylvania lawsuits touch on both antitrust and discriminatory practices. Another case filed in New Mexico in late August 2024 by Zachary Benjamin against the New Mexico Association of REALTORS® (NMAR) focuses on alleged discriminatory allegations, violations of the New Mexico Human Rights Act and breaches of contract.
Benjamin was fired from his role as NMAR’s chief executive officer only a few months into his three-year contract—a contract he relied on when he relocated from California to New Mexico with his wife and six-year-old daughter, he claimed.
Benjamin alleges that he was fired and subjected to harassment and discrimination based on his Jewish religion.
In the court document, Benjamin said that he was cautioned about expressing his religion, observing Jewish holidays or expressing pro-Israel statements, as it would “give ammunition” for NMAR board members to take disciplinary action against him. Further, this discrimination increased throughout his tenure and became the basis for the NMAR board and staff to build their case to terminate him.
He was not provided with a written notice on any performance issues before being fired and NMAR refused to provide written documentation on its “Just Cause” to Benjamin, according to the filing. Instead, NMAR informed him orally that it was due to his efforts in investigating the potential sale of the New Mexico Multiple Listing Service (NMMLS) and concerns about his investigation into the proper classification of NMAR’s employees.
Allegedly, NMAR’s management and president were aware of the harassment but failed to take any actions against it, despite the company’s anti-discrimination policies.
Lola Franklin, CEO at NMAR, did not return RISMedia’s request for comment.
To review the filings, see here for the lawsuits from Louisiana, Pennsylvania and New Mexico.
