The National Association of Realtors and local realtor groups at the center of a proposed class action have urged a Michigan federal court not to allow real estate brokers and agents to bring recent NAR handbook changes before the court in their antitrust suit.

The realtor groups argued that litigants misstepped when they introduced claims that the NAR effectively admitted to their antitrust claims when it revoked a policy requiring they be members of the NAR in order to access multiple listing services, databases in which properties are marketed.

The plaintiffs sought to introduce the new information under the guise of a motion for leave to file supplemental authority, but such motions only allow for plaintiffs to make the court aware of relevant new legal precedent, the realtor groups argued.

"Here, plaintiffs seek to introduce a fact for the court to consider in deciding the motion to dismiss: that NAR updated its MLS policy handbook," the realtor groups said. "This factual information is not legal precedent. A notice of supplemental authority is thus inappropriate here and leave should be denied."

The NAR announced on Nov. 17 that it had made a total of 18 changes to its handbook policies, each approved by a policy risk advisory board comprising brokers, association executives, multiple listing services executives and industry partners, according to an NAR letter of MLS leaders included in the plaintiffs' filing. The changes removed language regarding membership requirements and emphasized local control.

The proposed class told the court in a November motion that the NAR, "by changing its policies to avoid future antitrust litigation, is essentially admitting that its previous policy was a violation of antitrust law."

The realtor groups added in their Wednesday filing that the court is barred from considering the NAR policy changes and may only look to facts pled in the complaint when weighing the plaintiff's motion to dismiss. And even if it were to consider the facts the agents and brokers seek to introduce, the changes would not be pertinent to the plaintiffs' claims, they alleged.

"In any event, NAR's MLS policy handbook update is in no way an admission of anything," the realtor groups said.

In a complaint they filed in January, the agents and brokers challenged the expensive memberships needed to access their NAR-run multiple listing service, despite the diminished value of these memberships following a rule change implemented as part of a $418 million settlement with home sellers.

Under the revision, MLS listings can no longer contain buyer-agent commissions. But without these compensation listings, there is no reason to join local realtor groups, the plaintiffs contended.

The suit lists the NAR, the Michigan Association of Realtors, the Grosse Pointe Board of Realtors, the Greater Metropolitan Association of Realtors, the North Oakland County Board of Realtors and Realcomp II LLC. The proposed class alleged illegal restraint of trade, violations of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act, economic coercion and civil conspiracy.

Counsel for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

The plaintiffs are represented by Michael S. Clawson.

The National Association of Realtors and Michigan Association of Realtors are represented by Larry J. Saylor and Kimberly L. Scott of Miller Canfield Paddock & Stone.

The North Oakland County Board of Realtors is represented by Richard D. Linnell of Linnell & Associates PLLC.

The Greater Metropolitan Association of Realtors is represented by David J. DeVine and Sheldon H. Klein of Butzel Long.

The Grosse Pointe Board of Realtors is represented by Jared A. Roberts of Fraser Trebilcock Davis Dunlap & Cavanaugh PC.

Realcomp is represented by Brian O'Keefe and Alexander E. Blum of Lippitt O'Keefe PLLC and Harvey R. Weingarden of Weingarden Law PLLC.

The case is Hardy et al. v. National Association of Realtors et al., case number 2:24-cv-12102, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.