The Gibson v. NAR lawsuit is a nationwide antitrust class action that accused the National Association of Realtors and major brokerages of conspiring to force home sellers to pay inflated commissions to buyers’ agents. It has produced more than $1 billion in settlements, changed how real estate agents are paid across the country, and is still partially unresolved while appeals sit before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
What the Lawsuit Alleged
For decades, a home listed on a Multiple Listing Service came with a built-in offer of compensation to whichever agent brought the buyer. Sellers paid both sides. Total commissions commonly ran around five to six percent of the sale price.
The plaintiffs argued that this wasn’t the market at work. NAR’s rules, they said, effectively required sellers to offer compensation to buyer brokers as a condition of listing on an MLS. That severed the connection between the buyer who hired an agent and the payment of that agent’s fee, eliminated price competition among buyer brokers, and inflated the cost of selling a home in violation of federal antitrust law.
The Parties and the Court
The case is captioned Gibson, et al. v. The National Association of Realtors, et al., Case No. 4:23-cv-00788-SRB, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri and consolidated with Case No. 4:23-cv-00945-SRB.1United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Gibson et al v. National Association of Realtors et al The named plaintiffs are Don Gibson, Lauren Criss, John Meiners, and Daniel Umpa.2Cohen Milstein. Order Final Approval Gibson v. NAR U.S. District Judge Stephen R. Bough presides.
Gibson is one of four related cases challenging the same practices. The others are Burnett (also called Sitzer/Burnett), Moehrl, and Umpa, coordinated and resolved through overlapping settlements.3Susman Godfrey LLP. Susman Godfrey Announces $418M Settlement With the National Association of Realtors Defendants include NAR, HomeServices of America, Keller Williams, RE/MAX, Anywhere Real Estate (formerly Realogy), Compass, Redfin, Douglas Elliman, and dozens of other brokerages.
The Sitzer/Burnett verdict changed the pressure on everyone. On October 31, 2023, a Missouri jury returned a $1.8 billion verdict against NAR and several brokerages, finding a conspiracy to inflate seller-paid commissions.4Ohio State Bar Association. NAR Settlement Brings New Changes to Buying and Selling Real Estate Because antitrust damages are trebled, the defendants faced potential exposure of $5.4 billion. Settlements followed.
The Settlements
None of the settling defendants admitted liability or wrongdoing. The dollar figures are the largest:
- NAR agreed to pay $418 million in four annual installments, plus $3 million toward class notice costs. Final approval came on November 27, 2024. NAR’s counsel told the Eighth Circuit that this amount “demands more than half of NAR’s available assets.”5Cohen Milstein. Home Sellers Reach Landmark $418M Settlement With the National Association of Realtors6Real Estate News. Appellants Have Their Final Say About Commissions Settlements
- HomeServices of America agreed to $250 million, also finally approved on November 27, 2024.7Cohen Milstein. Moehrl v. National Association of Realtors et al
- Anywhere Real Estate agreed to $83.5 million and Keller Williams to $70 million.8HousingWire. Two Parties Appeal Final Approval of RE/MAX, Keller Williams, and Anywhere Settlement Agreements
- Compass, Real Brokerage, Realty ONE, @properties, Douglas Elliman, Redfin, Engel & Völkers, HomeSmart, and United Real Estate agreed collectively to more than $110 million, finally approved November 4, 2024.9PR Newswire. Class Action Settlements Totaling Over $730 Million
- Hanna Holdings, William Raveis, EXIT Realty, Windermere, and William L. Lyon & Associates agreed to a combined $39.7 million (Hanna Holdings alone accounts for $32 million), approved February 5, 2026.10Real Estate News. 5 More Settlements Approved in Gibson Commissions Case
- NextHome, Keyes Company, John L. Scott, LoKation, Real Estate One, and Baird & Warner received final approval on June 24, 2025.2Cohen Milstein. Order Final Approval Gibson v. NAR
Who Qualifies and Where the Money Is
The settlement class is broad. It covers anyone who sold a home listed on an MLS anywhere in the United States and paid a commission to a real estate brokerage during the eligible period. You didn’t need to have used an agent from a defendant brokerage to qualify.11Real Estate Commission Litigation. Gibson FAQ
Eligible dates vary by defendant and, in some cases, by state. For most settlements the window is October 31, 2019 through July 23, 2024, and for certain defendants and states (including Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and twelve others) the window reaches back to 2017 or 2018.2Cohen Milstein. Order Final Approval Gibson v. NAR
The claims administrator is JND Legal Administration.12Real Estate Commission Litigation. FAQ The main filing deadline was May 9, 2025; a later wave of settlements had a December 30, 2025 deadline.13Real Estate Commission Litigation. Gibson 3 and Keel 2 Settlements More than 2.69 million claims had been submitted by early 2026.14HousingWire. Commission Settlement Final Approval
No money has gone out yet. Objectors’ appeals are pending at the Eighth Circuit, and the settlements can’t become final until those appeals resolve.15Real Estate Commission Litigation. Gibson Settlement The official settlement website says “there is currently no timeline for resolution of these appeals.” Once they are resolved, plaintiffs’ counsel must propose a distribution plan for the court to approve. Payouts will be calculated pro rata based on the commissions each claimant paid, and if total claims exceed the fund, everyone’s share is reduced proportionally.12Real Estate Commission Litigation. FAQ
What Changed for Buyers and Sellers
The practice changes took effect on August 17, 2024, and they apply regardless of how the appeals resolve.16National Association of Realtors. Final Reminder of August 17 NAR Practice Change Implementation Two reforms sit at the center.
Buyer-agent compensation can no longer be advertised on the MLS. Sellers may still offer to pay a buyer’s agent, but any such offer has to move outside the MLS: direct negotiation, broker websites, or the purchase offer itself.17National Association of Realtors. NAR Settlement FAQs
Written buyer-representation agreements are now mandatory. Before an agent takes a buyer to tour a home, the buyer has to sign an agreement specifying the agent’s compensation in concrete terms: a dollar amount, a percentage, or an hourly rate. The number can’t be open-ended, and the agent can’t collect more than the agreed amount from any source.18National Association of Realtors. What the NAR Settlement Means for Home Buyers and Sellers Both listing and buyer agreements have to include conspicuous disclosures stating that broker commissions are not set by law and are fully negotiable.17National Association of Realtors. NAR Settlement FAQs
Has Anything Actually Changed in Practice
The goal was price competition in a market where commission rates had barely moved for decades. Early data suggests the shift has been slow. A Redfin study cited in a May 2025 report found buyer agents earning roughly the same commissions as before, with sellers still paying the bulk of buyer-agent compensation.19Marketplace. What Has Changed Since the Real Estate Commission Lawsuit Brokers point to practical reasons. Buyers often can’t finance an agent’s commission, and sellers in a soft market don’t want to do anything that might scare off offers. A hotter seller’s market with multiple bids would give sellers leverage to push that fee back onto buyers.
What has changed is transparency. Buyers and sellers now see written numbers upfront, and conversations about fees happen before showings rather than at closing.20Yahoo Finance. NAR Settlement Some confusion has followed, including buyers who think they must pay their agent out of pocket or who skip representation to avoid fees.
What’s Still Pending
The Eighth Circuit heard oral argument on the settlement appeals on January 14, 2026, in a case docketed as No. 24-3473.21U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Gibson v. National Association of Realtors Objectors have challenged the settlement amounts, class standing, and the scope of the class, including whether sellers who also bought during the period should be included and whether sales under the Real Estate Board of New York should fall within the settlement.6Real Estate News. Appellants Have Their Final Say About Commissions Settlements A decision is expected in late spring or early summer of 2026. NAR has said the pending appeals don’t affect the practice changes already in place. If the Eighth Circuit vacated the approvals, it could force new negotiations and extend the uncertainty.22HousingWire. Appeal Hearing Threatens NAR Settlement, Raising Industry Uncertainty
The federal government is still watching. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division has an ongoing probe of NAR and has filed Statements of Interest in related cases, including Nosalek v. MLS PIN in Massachusetts and Davis et al. v. Hanna Holdings Inc. in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.23Real Estate News. DOJ Weighs In on Another Commissions Lawsuit In Davis, the DOJ opposed a motion to dismiss in December 2025, arguing that trade-association rules like NAR’s “are not automatically exempt from the per se rule against horizontal price fixing.” Abigail Slater, assistant attorney general for antitrust, said “today’s soaring housing prices make competition in real estate brokerage more important than ever.” In June 2024, the DOJ also opened a formal inquiry into buyer agreement forms produced by the California Association of Realtors.