Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—N.D. Ill.: Consolidation granted for seven Realtor® broker commission class actions, (Oct 24, 2025)

By Kenneth H. Ryesky, M.B.A., J.D.

That the plaintiff in one of the cases had not yet filed a second amended complaint as ordered by the court was no impediment to consolidation.

The federal district court in Chicago, Illinois has granted a motion to consolidate seven cases alleging anticompetitive activities by real estate brokers in conjunction with the national real estate brokerage trade group over opposition by two defendant brokers in one of the cases. A homeowner alleged that NAR-promulgated procedures followed by AWP lacked transparency, such that Tuccori and similarly situated individuals were unaware that the broker paid a commission by the buyer was effectively receiving a commission from the seller as well. This opacity allegedly led to brokerage commission rates averaging five to six percent in the U.S., as compared to rates of less than three percent in other highly industrialized nations. The court found that consolidation would further the ends of judicial economy (Tuccori v. At World Properties, LLC, No. 1:24-cv-00150 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 22, 2025)).

The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) is a real estate industry trade association headquartered in Chicago and has more than 1.5 million members, including real estate agents, brokers, managers, and appraisers in numerous regional affiliated local organizations nationwide. NAR-affiliated organizations collectively maintain hundreds of regional databases of real properties available for sale or rent; these databases are known as Multiple Listing Services (MLS); each MLS operates according to rules NAR has promulgated. Other aspects of industry practice are done in accordance with NAR's guidelines and policies.

Tuccori purchased a residence in Chicago in a transaction arranged by At World Properties, LLC (AWP), a real estate brokerage business whose brokers and salespersons were NAR members. In 2023, Tuccori brought a putative class action lawsuit in Illinois state court against AWP, alleging that AWP and NAR engaged in anticompetitive practices, specifically, the NAR-promulgated procedures followed by AWP lacked transparency, such that Tuccori and similarly situated individuals were unaware that the broker paid a commission by the buyer was effectively receiving a commission from the seller as well. This opacity, alleged Tuccori, has led to brokerage commission rates averaging five to six percent in the United States, as compared to rates of less than three percent in "other highly industrialized nations, including the United Kingdom (UK), Hong Kong, Ireland, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand."

Tuccori's lawsuit included claims under the Sherman Act, Illinois Antitrust Act, and Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The Illinois state court case was removed to the federal district court.

Pending in the federal court were six other lawsuits brought by other plaintiffs against other real estate brokers; these were all assigned (or reassigned) to the same judge. Each of the 16 defendants in the seven cases is alleged to have conspired with NAR by acting in accordance with NAR's promulgated policies, thereby causing injury to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs in the seven cases sought consolidation of the lawsuits. Two real estate brokerage firms who were named as defendants in one of the cases objected to the consolidation.

The court granted the motion to consolidate. Here, there were overlapping issues and questions of law and fact, including (1) existence of a Sherman Act conspiracy violation; (2) whether the practices complained of constituted unlawful restraints on trade; (3) the effect, if any, upon broker commissions by the practices complained of; and (4) questions under the applicable state antitrust or deceptive practices laws. That the overlap was not totally on point did not defeat the propriety of consolidation.

Weighing heavily in favor of consolidation were matters of judicial economy. Here, 13 of the 16 defendants had reached mediated settlements with the plaintiffs. The preliminary approval (and later, the fairness hearing and final approval) could all be done together instead of in seven separate proceedings. The objecting defendants would not be prejudiced by consolidation if they were to choose to continue litigation (as they indicated they intended to do), and would still be able to litigate even if the cases are consolidated.

The Case is No. 1:24-cv-00150.

Judge: Jenkins, L.

Attorneys: Jonathan Marc Jagher (Freed Kanner London & Millen LLC) for James Tuccori. Robert John Palmersheim (Honigman LLP) for At World Properties, LLC.

Companies: At World Properties, LLC

Cases: Antitrust IllinoisNews