What was the basis for Corcoran's Motion to Dismiss the Moehrl matter?
Corcoran Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
gainst Us.**
None
B. Other Pending Litigation.
- Christopher Moehrl, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. The National Association of Realtors, Realogy Holdings Corp., HomeServices of America, Inc., Re/Max Holdings, Inc., and Keller Williams Realty, Inc., (Case No. 1:19-cv-01610, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois). On March 6, 2019, plaintiff, Christopher Moehrl, filed a putative class action against Anywhere and the other named defendants. Plaintiff claims that the defendants engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, because defendant The National Association of Realtors ("NAR"), established mandatory anticompetitive policies for the MLSs and its member brokers regarding the setting and payment of the buyer broker commission. Plaintiff further alleges that the defendant franchisors conspired with NAR by requiring their respective franchisees to comply with NAR's policies and Code of Ethics. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction enjoining the defendants from requiring sellers to pay the buyer broker or to otherwise restrict competition among buyer brokers, an award of damages and/or restitution, including treble damages with joint and several liability, attorneys' fees and costs of suit. On April 15, 2019, a related case was filed in the same district against the same defendants, making similar claims and seeking similar relief on behalf of the same potential class. The related case is captioned Sawbill Strategic, Inc. v. The National Association of Realtors, HomeServices of America, Inc.
Source: Item 3 — LITIGATION (FDD pages 18–25)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to Corcoran's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, Christopher Moehrl filed a class action lawsuit against Anywhere (referred to as Realogy Holdings Corp. in the document) and other named defendants on March 6, 2019. The plaintiff's claim was that the defendants were engaged in a contract, combination, or conspiracy that would unreasonably restrain trade and commerce, violating Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The claim was based on the National Association of Realtors' (NAR) allegedly anticompetitive policies regarding the setting and payment of buyer broker commissions. The plaintiff further alleged that Corcoran, as a franchisor, conspired with NAR by requiring franchisees to comply with NAR's policies and Code of Ethics.
The plaintiff in the Moehrl matter sought a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from requiring sellers to pay the buyer broker or restrict competition among buyer brokers. The plaintiff also sought damages and/or restitution, including treble damages with joint and several liability, as well as attorneys' fees and costs of the suit. On May 17, 2019, Corcoran and the other defendants filed Motions to Dismiss the Moehrl matter.
The document does not specify the exact legal basis Corcoran used in its Motion to Dismiss. However, it does state that on August 5, 2019, Anywhere and the other defendants filed Motions to Dismiss, which were denied on October 16, 2019. It is important to note that the case continued, with the filing of a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, further motions, and court rulings, ultimately leading to a settlement. A prospective franchisee should seek clarification from Corcoran regarding the specific arguments made in the Motion to Dismiss and the reasons for its denial by the court.