NAR off the hook in Pennsylvania membership lawsuit
The year-old case challenging the association’s membership rules was appealed after a July dismissal; the higher court has now dismissed the suit as well.
It appears to be the end of the road for a mandatory membership lawsuit filed just over a year ago.
On Oct. 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed the case brought by Maurice Muhammad against the National Association of Realtors, the Pennsylvania Association of Realtors and the Greater Lehigh Valley Multiple Listing Service.
In a short filing, the court said the case was dismissed because Muhammad failed to file an appellate brief and appendix. Later the same day, the plaintiff filed a motion asking that the appeal be reinstated, saying he did not receive an order or notice requiring the filing, but the judge has not yet responded.
Even if the dismissal stands, NAR isn't out of the woods yet: The journey continues for related lawsuits in several other states.
What this case was about: Muhammad filed the lawsuit in October 2024, alleging that requiring agents to join NAR in order to gain access to their local MLS was a violation of antitrust laws.
The plaintiff also alleged that this policy disproportionately affected minority professionals who lacked the financial resources to pay the mandatory fees.
The case was previously dismissed by a Pennsylvania district court in July after the judge ruled there were no indications that the plaintiff was excluded from participation in the association or the MLS. The case was appealed in August.
Other lawsuits still being litigated: The Pennsylvania case was one of several similar complaints filed in 2024 and 2025 involving NAR membership rules. At issue are requirements tying MLS access to Realtor membership, as well as NAR's three-way agreement, which mandates that Realtors join — and pay dues to — their local, state and national associations if they choose to join any one association.
A Texas case dismissed by a district court in July is also going through the appeal process.
Additional mandatory membership cases have been filed in California, Georgia, Michigan and Louisiana, with the latest case filed in Washington, D.C., in September.
What NAR says about membership policies: The trade group has defended the system, arguing that its policies foster competition and are not discriminatory.
"Like other national membership organizations, NAR's integrated structure is essential to the value we provide our members, including a unified voice on policy issues, a uniform Code of Ethics, and valuable tools and professional development opportunities that help members get to, and execute, their next transaction," NAR said in a previous statement following the dismissal of the Muhammad case in July.