Top Agent Network, Inc. vs. the National Association of REALTORS® has officially set a trial schedule and date for 2025.
TAN vs. NAR is a little different from the many other antitrust cases currently circling the real estate sphere. The non-commission based case alleges that defendants NAR and San Francisco Association of REALTORS® specifically blacklisted Top Agent Network, and used the Clear Cooperation policy to monopolize real estate listing services in violation of antitrust statutes.
The trial date is set for Nov. 3, 2025, with the cutoff for discovery set for Feb. 28 and a range of dates between leading up to the pre-trial conference set for Oct. 21.
At a court hearing today, lawyers representing the defendants did attempt to argue for a few more months of discovery, hoping to delay the case most likely into 2026. Judge Vince Chhabria, however, denied this, stating that “this case has dragged on long enough… this is an issue that needs to get resolved and it needs to be a priority for the parties to get it resolved.”
The Clear Cooperation conversation
TAN vs. NAR has had much conversation surrounding MLS rules, specifically on the issue of NAR’s Clear Cooperation policy and whether it should be repealed.
Conversation has sparked even more since the DOJ has stated they are still intent on investigating Clear Cooperation—although due to NAR’s recent appeal they agreed to delay their investigation until after the Supreme Court rules.
“I think it’s not ‘Clear Cooperation.’ I think it’s forced cooperation,” Compass CEO Robert Reffkin said, as part of a one-on-one interview with RISMedia Founder and CEO John Featherston during the recent CEO & Leadership Exchange. “The thing I’d like to see is MLSs having people use them because they want to, not because they’re forced to. And I think that is inevitable. We need to do that before lawyers make us do that.”
“NAR senior leadership should just say, ‘This is not worth the risk,’ and we move on,” Reffkin added
A Compass spokesperson told RISMedia via email that they are “one of nearly 70 brokerages” currently calling for an end to clear cooperation.
NAR’s Katie Johnson acknowledged at CEO & Leadership Exchange conference that Compass has officially submitted a proposal to reconsider or repeal the Clear Cooperation, which will be taken up by the MLS Technology and Emerging Issues Advisory Board on Sept. 13.
On the other hand, there are still many in the industry who support Clear Cooperation and disagree with Reffkin’s calls on it.
“I fundamentally disagree with Robert. I fundamentally believe in organized real estate and how it functions in North America. We have a complete, accurate, liquid marketplace, which is the beauty of the MLSs,” said eXp Realty CEO Leo Pareja. “I think what Robert is saying is selfish, and it’s not good for the consumer. We have to stop worrying about our stock price and take care of buyers and sellers.”
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to RISMedia for updates.
Read the last paragraph. That is real leadership. Well said Leo!
I agree with Leo
the intent of clear cooperation makes good sense for consumers and realtors alike – everyone gets a fair crack at a property and it adds transparency which is what the DOJ has required. Sadly, as its currently written, clear cooperation is fraught with realtors taking advantage of the rules. How many times haven’t we seen a new listing appear on social media after 5pm on Thursday….the realtors has to have the listing active within 24 hours on the mls….but a post after 5pm on Thursday pushes the compliance past 5pm on Friday, so the listing doesn’t go active on the MLS until the next business day which is typically Monday! The rule needs to be calendar not business days
Leo is right on. It’s not about allowing additional private listing networks, agents are allowed to advertise the property listing on any website or listing network but they must also put it in the MLS so every agent and buyer has ability to find and purchase the property. Allowing agents/brokers to restrict access to their listings to select other agents is unfair to the public and to agents not invited to the private listing network (PLN). Allowing PLN agents to have access to all of my listings but not allowing me to have access to theirs because they have them only on their private listing network is unfair and is fraught with the appearance of a discriminatory practice.