Plaintiffs
and
defendants
in
the
Moehrl

commission
lawsuit
have
waited
more
than
five
years
for
their
day
in
court.
Based
on
the
parties’
latest
status
report,
it
looks
like
they
will
be
waiting
a
bit
longer.

In
a
status
report
filed
on
Monday,
the
plaintiffs
and
the

sole
remaining
defendant
in
the
suit,


HomeServices
of
America,
each
indicated
they
would
be
available
for
a
three-
to
four-week
trial
starting
Jan.
21,
2025.

The
trial
would
take
place
in
Chicago
at
the

U.S.
District
Court
Northern
District
of
Illinois
Eastern
Division
before
Judge
Andrea
R.
Wood.
In
November
2023,
Wood
indicated
that
the
trial
would
take
place
in
the

fourth
quarter
of
2024,
but
the
status
report
findings
appear
to
change
the
timeline.

Originally
filed
in
March
2019,
the
Moehrl
lawsuit
alleges
that
real
estate
industry
participants
including
HomeServices,
the


National
Association
of
Realtors
(NAR),


Anywhere,


RE/MAX
and


Keller
Williams
conspired
to
artificially
inflate
real
estate
agent
commissions.
At
the
center
of
the
lawsuit
is
NAR’s
Participation
Rule,
which
requires
listing
brokers
to
make
a
blanket
offer
of
compensation
to
the
buyer’s
broker
in
order
to
list
a
property
on
a
Realtor-affiliated
MLS.

The
suit
obtained
class
certification
in
March
2023.
The
class
encompasses
home
sellers
across
20
local
MLSs.
Damages
in
the
suit
could
reach
$13.7
billion
—
or
$41.1
billion
if
trebled.

Anywhere,
RE/MAX,
Keller
Williams
and
NAR
have
all

reached
settlement
agreements
in
the
Moehrl
case
and
other

commission
lawsuits,
although
of
the
settlement
agreements
have
received
final
court
approval.

On
Tuesday,
Judge
Stephen
Bough,
who
oversaw
the

Sitzer/Burnett
trial
in
October
2023,

denied
HomeServices’
motion
to
decertify
the
class.
HomeServices
still
has
a
motion
for
a
new
trial
and
a
motion
for
judgment
as
a
matter
of
law
before
the
court.

The
firm
also
still
has
a writ
of
certiorari
with
the U.S.
Supreme
Court,
which
it
filed
in
early
February.
In
its
filing,
HomeServices
asked
for
a
review
of
an
August
2023
ruling
by
the
Eighth
Circuit
Court,
which
found
that
HomeServices
could
not
enforce
arbitration
agreements
signed
by
seller
clients
of
its
franchisees.
The
appeals
court
said
that
this
was
because
the
contracts
signed
by
the
sellers
were
not
directly
signed
by
HomeServices.

Related