A
motion to dismiss was filed by attorneys for the defendants in the Michigan mandatory membership lawsuit, known as the Hardy case. Three real estate professionals are suing the National Association of Realtors, their state and local real estate associations, and Realcomp II, which operates a multiple listing service in the area. The plaintiffs claim that requiring brokers to be dues-paying members of three organizations to access the MLS is an antitrust violation and "economic coercion," depriving them of free choice.

    The defendants argue that competition isn't an issue because the associations and MLS aren't competing against anyone, nor do they hold power over the real estate market. They also assert that much of the data in the MLS is publicly available, contradicting the plaintiffs' statement that brokers have no alternate source to the information contained on the MLS.

    The defendants point out contradictory statements made by the plaintiffs, who argue that removing offers of compensation from the MLS "truly eliminated" its purpose, yet claim that MLS access is essential for transacting business. The attorneys state, "Plaintiffs can't have it both ways." The plaintiffs acknowledge the value of MLS data but object to paying membership fees as a prerequisite for access.

    Several other agents and brokers across the U.S. are challenging mandatory membership and MLS access in federal court cases currently underway in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Louisiana. The outcomes could impact NAR's three-way agreement requiring local Realtor association members to also join state and national associations.