Legal Case Summaries

Case summaries are provided for educational purposes only, and are not a substitute for legal advice by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. Case law may change over time, so be sure to confirm a case is still good law. 

Search Legal Case Summaries

Louisiana court rules that real estate professional's failure to notify lender about reduced sales price did not affect the buyer's ability to qualify for a loan by the required date and so entered judgment in favor of the real estate professional.

Federal appellate court reversed trial court’s summary judgment, allowing resident to pursue claim that city’s failure to make reasonable accommodation to municipal ordinance and permit resident to keep a miniature horse as a service animal on resident’s property was in violation of the ADA and FHA.

Wisconsin appellate court reverses trial court and affirms jury's award to buyer when the broker failed to include documents signed by the parties in the closing documents.

Illinois appellate court rules that owner breached listing agreement when it conducted secret negotiations with a buyer that the broker had introduced to the property.

Court rules that failure to attach a dual agency consent form to purchase and sale agreement did not invalidate the contract, despite the fact that the contract’s terms required that the form be attached.

Supreme Court of the United States rules that an Arizona town unconstitutionally regulated signs by their content and thus violated the First Amendment.

In the final piece of the litigation involving the website (operated by the American Home Realty Network), the court entered judgment in favor of NAR over allegations of antitrust violations.

In a long running legal battle over patent infringement allegations, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a California federal court’s decision that Move’s websites, including REALTOR®.com, do not infringe Real Estate Alliance, Ltd.’s patents.

Court rules that broker’s cancelation of commercial listing agreement was proper in light of the fact that the entity with whom Broker had entered listing agreement did not have authority to sell the property.