The National Association of Realtors (NAR) hasn’t been shy about trying to dismiss the growing crop of lawsuits alleging that its three-way membership agreement structure constitutes an antitrust violation, and things are no different with the Eytalis suit in Texas.
On Thursday, NAR and the two other defendants in the case, the Texas Realtors (TR) and Wichita Falls Association of Realtors (WFAR), filed a motion to dismiss the suit’s third amended complaint. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint in mid-December. The suit was initially filed in early December 2024 by real estate broker Luz de Amor Eytalis.
In their latest motion, the defendants claim that the complaint “fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against Defendants.”
In a brief supporting this motion, the defendants argue that Eytalis simply wants to access the membership and services provided by NAR, Texas Realtors and WFAR without paying the required dues and fees.
In her suit, Eytalis claims that the defendants have violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by requiring membership in order to access the MLS. But in their brief, the defendants note that it is up to WFAR alone, as a local association, to determine if it wants to require Realtor membership in order for a licensee to gain access to the association’s MLS.
“But even putting that aside, Plaintiff does not adequately plead any element of an antitrust violation or plead that Defendants have caused harm to competition as a whole versus just harm to her individually,” the motion states.
The defendants also address Eytalis’ claims of breach of contract and unjust enrichment, saying that neither are supported by fact. They note that the alleged breach-of-contract claim is “premised on certain actions taken supposedly in violation of WFAR’s bylaws.”
“Plaintiff does not (and cannot) allege that NAR or TR were parties to these bylaws — and at any rate, the facts alleged by Plaintiff and those omitted by Plaintiff but necessarily incorporated into the pleadings do not show that WFAR or any other Defendant breached a contract,” the filing states.
In a reply filed on Friday, Eytalis describes her suit, in which she is representing herself pro se, as “a fundamental challenge to the monopolistic and exclusionary practices of Defendants, which have resulted in systemic harm to independent real estate brokers.”
“At its core, this lawsuit seeks to rectify the coercive policies that force brokers into mandatory association memberships as a condition for accessing the Multiple Listing Service (MLS), an essential tool for conducting real estate transactions,” Eytalis wrote. “The actions of Defendants not only stifle competition but also impose unjust financial burdens on brokers who wish to operate independently or outside the control of national and state real estate associations.”
She also claims that the business practices in question favor large, established brokerages over smaller and newer ones, “suppressing competition and hindering the ability of independent brokers to compete on a level playing field.”
Eytalis argues that the case should continue on to the discovery stage, as some of the arguments raised by the defendants about notices for membership dues sent to Eytalis’ agents by the defendants “raise factual disputes that cannot be resolved at this stage.”
“The importance of allowing discovery in this case cannot be overstated, as the complex nature of the claims requires full examination of evidence, including internal communications, financial transactions, and witness testimony, to uncover the extent of Defendants’ monopolistic actions,” she wrote.
According to Eytalis, some of the agents for whom she received dues requests had allowed their licenses to lapse and were no longer active in the industry, while one agent had passed away. It is things like this that she hopes to have come to light in the discovery process.
