Alice A. One lawyer in the anti -trading department of DOJ will appear in the 9th round of the Appeal Court on February 13 in the Outsula.
INMAN ON TOUR: Raise the volume of real estate in Nashville! It connects to the pioneers of the industry and the top speakers, gain powerful insights, state -of -the -art strategies, and valuable connections. Enhance your business and achieve your bold goal -all with music city magic. Please register now.
Several battles with the US Department of Justice with the National Real estate agency association rules are officially heading to the appeal court this month.
Please participate in the Inman Intel Index survey in January
On January 31, the 9th round of the Appeal Court was submitted by the current abolished discounted securities company REX, which is also known as a real estate estate exchange in a lawsuit against NAR. I acknowledged the request. Real estate major Zillow.
The oral discussion of this case is scheduled for February 13. The court assigns 20 minutes to each side, and DOJ can speak for another 5 minutes.
Alice A. Wan, a lawyer of the Lawyer of the DOJ’s anti -Trust sector, admitted the order and said he would appear in a hearing held in the Honolulu court.
The king wrote the motion on January 8 and demanded the time to speak. She wrote Amicus Brief, and DOJ submitted in June in June without taking the ultimate consequences of the lawsuit.
“Instead, the United States has a limited view of the case where the rules of the options can represent coordinated actions based on the Shaman Law section 1. King. I wrote it in the movement.
“Thus, the United States has urged the court to remove and return the lawsuit to apply the appropriate legal framework to the evidence of the case.”
The claim noted that none of the parties opposed the DOJ demand, but Zillow and NAR should add DOJ time without affecting the 20 Alotted Rex. While asking the court to add it to the court, I thought that it should come out of the Rex time for 5 minutes. Due to one side. The court agreed to Rex.
DOJ’s JUNE AMICUS BRIEF aims for the NAR optional “No Conging Ring” rule. This requires a securities company’s website to separate the display of the MLS list from the non -MLS list when adopted by MLS. REX does not use MLSS for most of its existence, and REX litigation claims that this is limited in the View of REX in Zillow, and its rules are anti -competitive.
The REX’s exclusive law on NAR and Zillow was abandoned before the trial, REX was defeated in the trial, and then the securities company was rejected to request a retrial. Rex appeals to the latter.
According to DOJ’s Amicus Brief, the “optional properties” of the “no -coming ring” rule do not hinder the potential anti -competitive. Surveillance by enacting such optional rules.
The DOJ claims that the Supreme Court’s precedent may include a “coordination lawsuit” in which the optional rules “actually essential”, and the court completely considers the Lex’s discussion. Nevertheless, the rules of the options were invited to “participate in a common plan” in NAR, MLSS, and Zillow, although they claimed to refuse to retrial the district court.
It has not yet been seen whether the appeal court agreed.
Please email Andrea v. Brambila.
Like me on Facebook | Please follow me on Twitter
