Morgan Properties, the largest private apartment landlord in the United States, is a defendant in a Morgan Properties lawsuit docket that spans tenant fee class actions in Maryland and New Jersey, a fair housing disability case in Pennsylvania, habitability settlements, and antitrust claims tied to RealPage’s rent-pricing software. Some cases have settled, others are back before trial courts on remand, and the RealPage matters — including suits by two state attorneys general — remain active as of 2026.
Maryland Fee-Churning Class Action
Four Maryland tenants sued Morgan Properties in December 2018 in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, alleging what they called a “fee-churning scheme.” According to the complaint in Roberson v. Morgan Properties Management Company, LLC, the company charged a 5% late fee, added “filing fees” that exceeded actual court costs by $20 to $30, then applied incoming rent payments to those disputed fees first. The base rent then registered as unpaid, triggering another round of late charges. Tenants said Morgan Properties inflated the amounts needed to avoid eviction and threatened removal of tenants who refused to pay.1Brown, Goldstein & Levy. Maryland Tenants File Class Action Lawsuit
The circuit court initially handed Morgan Properties a win, granting summary judgment and denying class certification. That changed on appeal. On February 13, 2026, the Appellate Court of Maryland issued its opinion in Kenisha Wright, et al. v. Morgan Properties Management Company, LLC (No. 533) and sent the case back to the circuit court. The appellate panel ordered a fresh look at whether Morgan Properties violated Maryland Real Property § 8-208 under the framework the Supreme Court of Maryland set out in Westminster Management, LLC v. Smith.2The Daily Record. Kenisha Wright, Et Al. v. Morgan Properties Management Company, LLC3CaseMine. Kenisha Wright, Et Al. v. Morgan Properties Management
The Westminster decision, issued March 25, 2024, defined “rent” narrowly as the fixed, periodic payment owed for occupying the premises. Lease clauses that fold late fees, attorney’s fees, or court costs into “rent” do not work for eviction purposes, and landlords cannot apply rent payments toward non-rent fees to manufacture a shortfall. The court also held that Maryland’s 5% cap on late fees is all-inclusive: a landlord cannot stack collection fees on top unless a court awards them separately.4Justia. Westminster Management, LLC v. Tenae Smith5Network for Public Health Law. Westminster Management, LLC, Et Al. v. Tenae Smith, Et Al. Because the practices alleged in Wright mirror what the Supreme Court condemned in Westminster, the tenants now have a second shot at class certification under stronger law. The circuit court had not yet acted on the remand as of early 2026.
New Jersey Attorney’s Fee Class Action
In Green v. Morgan Properties, New Jersey tenants challenged lease provisions requiring them to pay a flat $400 fee (or $200 in earlier lease versions) any time the company used an attorney to enforce the lease or start an eviction. They argued the flat charge far exceeded the actual cost of work performed by in-house counsel and violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.
The trial court dismissed the case, but the Appellate Division reversed in November 2011, holding that a flat rate exceeding actual legal costs “runs afoul of the general proscription that an attorney’s fee may not be shared with a non-attorney.”6New Jersey Courts. Green v. Morgan Properties, Docket No. A-1247-16T3 The New Jersey Supreme Court then ruled on September 17, 2013 (Green v. Morgan Properties, 215 N.J. 431), allowing the consumer fraud and negligence claims to move forward. The justices signaled that flat attorney fees in residential leases should bear a “direct and actual connection to time spent on a particular matter” and warned that a Consumer Fraud Act violation could expose landlords to treble damages.7vLex. Green v. Morgan Props., 215 N.J. 431
The plaintiffs said Morgan Properties filed roughly 200 eviction complaints a month in Camden County alone, generating potential flat-fee revenue up to $960,000 a year. In September 2017, the Appellate Division ruled that a narrowed class could be certified: tenants who were charged attorney fees but did not leave their apartments owing more than the fee amount. That class was estimated at least 5,294 tenants.6New Jersey Courts. Green v. Morgan Properties, Docket No. A-1247-16T3
Fair Housing Suit Over Rent Due Dates for Disabled Tenants
In August 2016, the Fair Housing Rights Center in Southeastern Pennsylvania sued Morgan Properties in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (No. 16-4677), alleging a company-wide refusal to shift rent due dates for tenants receiving Social Security Disability Insurance. SSDI checks often arrive after the first of the month, and a disabled tenant at Brookside Manor said his request for a matching due date was denied. Morgan Properties then charged him late fees and refused to renew his lease. The plaintiffs argued Morgan Properties routinely granted due-date adjustments to non-disabled tenants for unrelated reasons.8Relman Colfax PLLC. FHRC v. Morgan Properties Fair Housing9Disability Rights Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Federal District Court Rules That Altering Rent Due Date Can Be a Reasonable Accommodation
Judge R. Barclay Surrick denied Morgan Properties’ motion for summary judgment on June 29, 2018, finding a jury could conclude that adjusting due dates is “reasonable and necessary to afford disabled tenants an equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing.” The court rejected the company’s argument that individual due dates would burden its centralized software, in part because evidence showed the company already made similar adjustments at other properties.10GovInfo. FHRC v. Morgan Properties Management Company, Case No. 16-4677 The case settled in January 2019 for $480,000, with Morgan Properties agreeing to provide reasonable accommodations for tenants who need their rent due date to match SSDI payments.8Relman Colfax PLLC. FHRC v. Morgan Properties Fair Housing
Habitability Settlements in Maryland
Individual tenants have sued Morgan Properties over living conditions. In October 2019, the company settled two Maryland cases. Deanne Alexander, who lived at Columbia Pointe Apartments, received $65,000 after alleging a persistent roach infestation that forced her to throw out her belongings and move. Esmeralda Herrera, a tenant at Glen Ridge Apartments in Glen Burnie, received $55,000 after alleging roach, mice, and bed bug infestations that management denied. Both settlements stated the payments were not admissions of liability.11WBAL-TV. Settlements Reached for 2 Families Who Had Roaches, Pests in Home
RealPage Rent-Fixing Litigation
Morgan Properties is named as a defendant in antitrust litigation alleging that major landlords used RealPage, Inc.’s algorithmic pricing software to coordinate rents and share non-public competitive data. The claims run in federal multidistrict proceedings and in two separate state attorney general suits.
Federal MDL Preliminary Settlement
In In re RealPage Inc. Rental Software Antitrust Litigation (No. II), the court granted preliminary approval on November 21, 2025, for 26 settlements covering 27 defendants, totaling $141.8 million in monetary relief along with cooperation and injunctive terms. Morgan Properties is a defendant in the consolidated case. The share attributable to Morgan Properties has not been publicly disclosed, and the claims process had not opened as of the preliminary approval date.12Robins Kaplan LLP. RealPage Federal Antitrust Class Action
Maryland Attorney General
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown sued RealPage and eight landlords, including Morgan Properties, on January 15, 2025, in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County. The complaint describes the defendants as a “cartel” that inflated rents above competitive levels by delegating a “substantial majority” of pricing decisions to RealPage’s algorithm and sharing non-public data. The state seeks injunctive relief, appointment of a corporate monitor, and refunds for affected Maryland residents.13Maryland Office of the Attorney General. Attorney General Brown Sues RealPage and Residential Landlords for Illegally Raising Rent
New Jersey Attorney General
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin filed a separate suit on April 23, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against RealPage and ten landlords, Morgan Properties among them. The complaint alleges violations of the federal Sherman Act, the New Jersey Antitrust Act, and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and seeks an injunction, civil penalties, disgorgement, and an independent monitor.14New Jersey Office of the Attorney General. AG Platkin Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Software Company RealPage and 10 NJ Landlords
On March 31, 2026, U.S. District Judge Madeline Cox Arleo partly granted and largely denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss. RealPage and most landlord defendants were ordered to face the antitrust allegations. Five landlords received individual dismissals — Aion Management, Cammeby’s Management, Kamson Corp., Russo Development, and AvalonBay — but Morgan Properties was not among them. The opinion was unsealed on May 15, 2026.15Multifamily Dive. New Jersey RealPage Antitrust Lawsuit Partially Dismissed16Cohen Milstein. RealPage Antitrust Litigation