The
first
week
of
the
much-anticipated

Sitzer/Burnett
class
action

buyer
broker
commission
antitrust
lawsuit
concluded
with
the
testimony
of
economic
and
legal
experts.

On
Friday,
Craig
Schulman,
an
associate
professor
of
economics
at Texas
A&M,
took
the
stand
again
to
be
cross-examined
by
Ethan
Glass,
the
defense
attorney
for
the


National
Association
of
Realtors,
according
to
reports
from

Inman
News.
Schulman
had
previously
testified

on
Thursday
and
was
questioned
by
Michael
Ketchmark,
the
lead
attorney
for
the
plaintiffs.

During
his
testimony
on
Thursday,
Schulman
stated
that
NAR’s
Participation
Rule,
which
is
central
to
the
lawsuit,
was
“one
of
the
clearest
cases
of
price-fixing
and
collusion
[he
has]
ever
seen.”
Under
cross
examination
on
Friday,
he
clarified
that
the
legal
question
of
whether
there
was
a
conspiracy
between
the
defendants
was
not
under
his
purview,
stating:
“That’s
the
job
of
the
jury.”

Roger
Alford,
a
law
professor
from
Notre
Dame,
was
also
called
to
testify
on
Friday.
During
his
testimony,
Alford
said
that
NAR’s
Participation
Rule
“is
not
designed
to
benefit
home
sellers.”
He
also
alleged
that
it
was
created
to
protect
the
trade
group
from
non-MLS
affiliated
brokers,
according
to
a

tweet
from

Real
Estate
News
reporter
Austin
Alonzo.

Monday’s
proceedings
are
expected
to
include
the
video
footage
of
the
depositions
of
Rosalie
Warner,
vice
president
of
network
services
for


HSF
Affiliates; Darrell
King,
a
former
COO
and
compliance
officer
for Keller
Williams; Cliff
Niersbach,
a
former
associate
general
counsel
for
NAR;
and Kevin
Goffstein, president
of Berkshire
Hathaway
HomeServices
Alliance
Real
Estate and Alliance
Title
Group.
Todd
Reyonlds,
an
Australian
real
estate
expert,
who
also
testified
on
Friday,
is
expected
to
return
to
the
stand
on
Monday.

Ketchmark
is
expected
to
rest
the
plaintiffs’
case
by
the
end
of
the
day
Monday.
Through
the
first
week
of
the
trial,
the
plaintiffs’
central
argument
has
been
that
despite
the
defendants
having
antitrust
rules
and
regulations
in
place,
documents
from
the
firms
presented
during
the
trial,
including
agent
training
scripts
discussing
commissions,
suggest
that
the
firms
are
knowingly
violating
their
own
rules.

While
the
defense
attorneys
for
all
three
defendants
present
at
the
trial
(RE/MAX
and


Anywhere
have
both
filed

settlement
agreements
and
are
not
present
in
the
Kansas
City
courtroom)
and
the
defendants
themselves
have
been
quick
to
state
that
commissions
were
only
mentioned
in
training
scripts
and
documents
as
examples
and
models,
the
full
picture
of
the
defense’s
argument
has
yet
to
be
made
clear.

With
Glass
expected
to
kick
off
the
defense
arguments
for
NAR,
a
clearer
picture
should
emerge
in
the
coming
days.