REX Petitions Supreme Court Over Alleged NAR-Zillow Conspiracy
The ongoing legal battle between REX and NAR-Zillow took an interesting turn as REX petitioned the Supreme Court to hear its appeal. The petition argues that optional rules, such as the no-commingling rule, can constitute a conspiracy, despite previous rulings in different circuits. REX claims that NAR’s rule-making process itself is a conspiracy, leading to antitrust violations and harm to competition.
REX’s legal saga began when Zillow complied with NAR’s no-commingling rule, leading to a two-tab design for MLS and non-MLS listings. Despite Zillow’s reluctance to support the rule, it was forced to adopt it to access MLS feeds. This move ultimately led to REX closing its brokerage operations in May 2022.
After a trial in September 2023, where REX’s antitrust claims were dismissed, REX filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied. The subsequent appeal in February 2024 was based on REX’s argument that it was unfairly prevented from presenting evidence on agent commissions.
Meanwhile, NAR repealed its optional no-commingling rule in June, citing feedback from the MLS community. NAR maintained that the rule was not an antitrust violation, emphasizing the importance of MLS in promoting fair housing markets.
As the legal battle continues, the Supreme Court petition highlights the broader implications of optional rules in evading antitrust scrutiny. The outcome of REX’s appeal could have significant implications for future antitrust cases involving industry associations and rule-making processes.