Lehrburger
granted
the
stay
during
a
hearing
on
Wednesday.
The
stay
was
requested
in
late
May
via
a
letter
sent
to
the
court
by
an
attorney
for
Engel
&
Völkers
New
York,
on
behalf
of
itself
and
16
other
defendants.

In
the
letter,
the
defendants
stated
that
the
nationwide

commission
lawsuit settlement
agreement reached
by
the National
Association
of
Realtors
(NAR)
contained
mechanisms
that
would
resolve
all
of
the
commission-related
antitrust
claims
that
had
brought
against
them.
They
also
noted
that
the
final
approval
hearing
for
the
settlement
is
slated
to
take
place
on
Nov.
26,
2024.

“Without
clarity
about
all
the
Defendants’
status
in
this
case,
it
is
impossible
to
agree
on
an
efficient
approach
to
briefing
motions
to
dismiss,”
the
letter
states.
“For
this
reason,
at
least
five
other
related
cases
nationwide
have
been
stayed
to
allow
defendants
time
to
determine
whether
they
will
opt
into
the
NAR
Settlement
framework
as
Released
Parties
and
to
allow
Released
Parties
to
receive
a
decision
on
final
approval.

“A
number
of
these
stays
have
been
entered
with
the
consent
of
all
parties
because
they
recognize
that
the
impact
of
the
NAR
Settlement
is
unknown
and
that
attempting
to
proceed
with
briefing
substantive
motions
will
waste
the
parties’
and
the
court’s
resources.”

Additionally,
Engel
&
Völkers
New
York
last
week
informed
the
court
that
it
had
reached
a
nationwide
settlement
of
the
claims
brought
about
in
the

Gibson
suit.

Despite
maintaining
that
its
Residential
Listing
Service
(RLS)
is
not
an
MLS,
REBNY
opted
into
NAR’s
settlement
agreement
in
mid-June
as
a
non-Realtor-affiliated
MLS.

In
a
response
to
the
defendants’
letter,
attorneys
for
the
Friedman
plaintiffs
argued
in
their
filing
that
the
claims
made
by
their
clients
will
not
be
released
by
the
NAR
settlement.

“Friedman
alleges
a
wholly
separate
conspiracy
perpetrated
through
The
Real
Estate
Board
of
New
York,
Inc.
(‘REBNY’)
to
inflate
buyer-broker
commissions
in
specific
areas
of
Brooklyn
for
homes
listed
on
REBNY’s
Residential
Listing
Service
(“RLS”)
under
the
REBNY
rules
and
code
of
ethics,” the
reply
states.

“NAR
is
not
a
party
in
Friedman,
and
REBNY
is
not
a
party
in
the
NAR
cases.
Indeed,
REBNY
and
NAR
have
nothing
[to]
do
with
each
other.
Unlike
the
NAR
conspiracy,
the
REBNY
conspiracy
involved
each
brokerage
and
principal
broker
agreeing
in
writing
to
abide
by
the
REBNY
rules
and
code
of
ethics
as
a
precondition
to
transacting
on
the
RLS.”

The
plaintiffs’
attorneys
also
claim
that
buyer
broker
commissions
in
New
York
City
are
“far
more
inflated
under
the
REBNY
conspiracy
than
the
distinct
NAR
conspiracy.”

Ultimately,
Lehrburger
rejected
the
plaintiffs’
arguments,
but
he
declined
to
rule
on
the
scope
of
the
settlement.
The
judge
stated
that
a
broader
ruling
was
not
needed
to
make
the
decision
to
grant
a
stay,
as
he
felt
the
criteria
usually
considered
for
a
stay
had
been
met.

After
Judge
Stephen
R.
Bough,
who
is
overseeing
the

Sitzer/Burnett
suit,
issues
his
ruling
in
late
November,
the
March
and
Friedman
defendants
will
have
two
weeks
to
file
a
motion
for
a
new
stay.
After
that,
the
plaintiffs
will
have
45
days
to
respond
and
the
defendants
will
have
another
21
days
to
reply.

The
March
and
Friedman
plaintiffs
are
not
the
only
ones
to
take
issue
with
NAR’s
settlement
agreement.

In
response
to

West
Penn
MLS‘
motion
to
stay
the

Moratis
suit,
the
plaintiffs
claimed
that
the
business
practice
changes
outlined
in
NAR’s
settlement
would
do
nothing
to
halt
the
alleged
conspiracy.

The
judge
overseeing
the
Moratis
suit
sided
with
the
plaintiffs
and
denied
West
Penn’s
motion
to
stay
the
case.