Legal Case Summaries

Michigan federal court dismisses lawsuit filed by attorney seeking MLS access without joining a REALTOR® association, with the court finding that the membership requirement isn’t a restraint on competition and it is reasonable for associations to tie membership to MLS access. 

Pennsylvania federal court rules that real estate brokerage did not owe fiduciary duties to seller when acting as a dual agent and so dismissed those claims against brokerage but allowed other claims made against brokerage to continue.

The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld an earlier determination that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau had incorrectly rejected a long-standing RESPA interpretation that payments made to settlement service providers are permissible so long as those payments are for goods or services actually provided and are for fair market value.

Maryland appellate court upholds real estate commission’s sanctions for licensee’s failure to disclose information about possible gas station leak into well water but reverses sanction for failure to disclose existence of HOA when in fact the entity was not an actual HOA.

Vermont’s highest court affirms trial court ruling that landlord did not have to accommodate tenant’s request for a support animal because the animal in question had exhibited aggressive behavior. 

Pennsylvania court affirms verdict against real estate professional for drafting a deficient contingency clause that prevented the buyers from using the property as they had anticipated. 

Florida appellate court finds that fact issues remained as to whether brokerage was vicariously liable for salesperson’s conduct and so remands case back to trial court.

In a case supported by NAR, Kansas’s highest court finds that town’s “transportation user fee” imposed a tax on property owners based on the use of their property and thus was an impermissible excise tax.

Vermont’s highest court rules that property owners could not claim that commercial solar panel array constituted a nuisance because the solar array did not interfere with the owners’ use of their property, even though the owners claimed that the aesthetics of the solar panels had damaged their property values.

California federal court rules that a company was not required to comply with website accessibility guidelines because the U.S. Department of Justice has failed to promulgate clear guidance on the accessibility requirements.