A Utah-based company that vowed to disrupt the real estate market — but ultimately flamed out before achieving its expansion dreams — lost a legal battle last month against the competitors that it blames for the downfall of its brokerage.
But it’s not done fighting the National Association of Realtors (NAR) and other brokerages, federal court records show. Homie appealed the July dismissal and its case is now before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
In dismissing Homie’s case, U.S. District Judge Dale A. Kimball pointed out that all but one of the NAR rules it attacked were in effect when it opened in 2015, and remained in effect “while Homie was actively gaining market share in Utah.”
The company said in court papers that between 2017 and 2021, Homie was “among the five largest brokerages by market share in the state.”
But that success stirred up “an anticompetitive campaign” by others that ultimately “hampered Homie’s ability to compete in Utah, permanently depressing Homie’s market share, revenue, and profitability,” it said, and thwarted its plans to expand.
The company said it has faced tough market forces since it was last on top in 2021 — escalating interest rates and fewer cash-rich investors and first time homebuyers. It’s also endured CEO shakeups and rounds of layoffs. In spring 2024, it shuttered brokerage services and its real estate agents lost their jobs (as title and lending teams were unaffected).
Meanwhile, competitors were conspiring against it, Homie alleged in a lawsuit filed last August, claiming some agents had refused to show properties to clients if the homeowners were working with Homie.
Homie accused NAR and other other brokerage “co-conspirators,” including Anywhere Real Estate and RE/MAX, of antitrust practices, alleging that their business practices hindered Homie’s ability to thrive in the open market.
Kimball heard arguments in the case in February and issued his ruling July 15. Homie’s attorneys filed their notice of appeal to the 10th Circuit on Aug. 7.
Representatives for Homie did not respond to The Salt Lake Tribune’s requests for comment. Attorneys representing the named defendants — which also included Homeservices of America and HSF Affiliates— also did not comment.
The arguments
Homie had argued in court filings that the defendants “intentionally interfered with Homie’s existing and potential economic relations, including by steering consumers away from Homie’s clients, causing Homie’s clients to cancel their contracts with Homie, and causing Homie’s business partners not to renew their existing contracts with Homie.”
This interference, Homie’s attorney wrote, was achieved by “utilizing anticompetitive rules to steer consumers away from Homie and implementing an illegal group boycott against Homie.”
Specifically, Homie called out five NAR rules that govern “multiple listing services,” often referred to individually as an MLS, which are essentially databases of the home listings offered by agents who are affiliated with NAR.
The five rules, enacted between 1996 and 2019, include requirements that all MLS listings must include a compensation offer for the agent who represents the buyer.
Homie argued that requiring that figure allowed brokers for buyers to “steer their clients away” from sellers offering lower commissions — like Homie’s clients. Homie’s business model was predicated on flattening what it considered exorbitant commissions or fees, charging a flat fee of $5,000 to sellers, for example.
The defendants responded by saying that Homie’s claims were filed too late and that it didn’t have legal standing to make an antitrust claim.
The ruling
In the dismissal order, Kimball agreed with the defendants, saying that the NAR rules Homie says impacted its business were adopted, at latest, four years prior to the filing of the lawsuit.
In the order, he cited Homie’s own recounting of its success.
“In other words, Homie, as a competitor to the members of the alleged conspiracy, took advantage of the elevated prices it attributes to the conspiracy and experienced durable commercial success for several years,” Kimball wrote. “That means Homie has not suffered an antitrust injury flowing from the NAR policies that allegedly inflated brokerage commissions.”
Even if the NAR’s “longstanding policies somehow abruptly ‘hampered Homie’s ability to compete in Utah’,” as Homie claimed, Kimball said the evidence Homie presented wouldn’t have been enough to prove an antitrust injury.
“As a matter of law, injury to a single competitor, standing alone, is not enough to prove antitrust injury,” Kimball said.
He said it appeared that Homie’s alleged boycotting harms “flowed from the independent actions of local real estate agents — not defendants."
NAR general counsel Jon Waclawski said on the association’s website in July that he was was “pleased” with the dismissal.
“NAR will continue,” Waclawski said, “to facilitate local real estate marketplaces that provide fair and equal access to property information, foster competition, and empower NAR members to serve clients on their homebuying and selling journeys.”