The lawsuit against Tamir Poleg is an alienation of affection suit filed by Michael Steckling, a Utah man who claims the Real Brokerage co-founder and CEO offered his wife, Paige, cash, stock proceeds, and a multimillion-dollar home to leave their marriage. Poleg has denied the central allegations, acknowledging only a “brief relationship” with the agent that he says began after he separated from his own spouse. The case is active in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah and remains in discovery as of mid-2026.
Who Filed the Suit and Against Whom
Michael Steckling filed the complaint on October 21, 2025, naming Tamir Poleg in his personal capacity. Poleg co-founded The Real Brokerage in 2014 and has served as chairman and CEO since launch; the company trades on NASDAQ as REAX and works with more than 33,000 agents in the United States and Canada.1Real Brokerage Investors. The Real Brokerage Named to Financial Times List of The Americas Fastest Growing Companies Paige Steckling, identified in filings and reporting as an independent contractor affiliated with Real, is not a party to the suit.2New York Post. Married Real Estate Mogul Offered Subordinate Multi-Million-Dollar Indecent Proposal to Leave Her Husband
The Real Brokerage itself is not a defendant. A company spokesperson has described the lawsuit as an isolated matter unrelated to the company’s culture.3The Real Deal. Real CEO Tamir Poleg Admits to Agent Relationship After Lawsuit
What the Complaint Alleges
The complaint pleads a single cause of action: alienation of affection. It describes a sequence of meetings the plaintiff says Poleg arranged with Paige Steckling before she filed for divorce.
- Las Vegas in October 2024.
- Park City, Utah in December 2024.
- Anaheim, California in January 2025, after which the complaint says Poleg made his financial offer.
The complaint also alleges that around January 26, 2025, Poleg booked a Miami hotel for himself and Paige for February 6 through 10, 2025.4Fox News. Steckling v. Poleg Notice of Removal and Complaint
On the money, Steckling alleges Poleg offered Paige upwards of $500,000 in cash and a Park City home valued between $2 million and $3 million in exchange for leaving the marriage. Then, on February 3, 2025, Poleg allegedly emailed Paige instructions for accessing $1.5 million, structured as $800,000 immediately and $700,000 in mid-March.5Real Estate News. Real Brokerage CEO Sued in Relation to Agent’s Divorce That same day, according to the complaint and SEC filings, Poleg sold 125,000 shares of Real stock for approximately $620,000. Steckling claims the sale funded the alleged offer. Three days later, on February 6, 2025, Paige filed for divorce.4Fox News. Steckling v. Poleg Notice of Removal and Complaint
Steckling seeks compensatory damages of no less than $5 million for loss of comfort, society, and consortium, plus punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.4Fox News. Steckling v. Poleg Notice of Removal and Complaint
How Poleg Has Responded
Poleg filed a formal response on January 16, 2026 denying the core allegations. He denies offering money or property in exchange for Paige ending her marriage. He denies that his stock sales were connected to any such offer. On the $1.5 million email, Poleg says the message went out only after Paige requested financial assistance, not as an unsolicited inducement.5Real Estate News. Real Brokerage CEO Sued in Relation to Agent’s Divorce
On the stock sale, an SEC Form 144 filing shows the February 3, 2025 transaction was made under a 10b5-1 trading plan Poleg had adopted on June 8, 2024, roughly eight months earlier.6StreetInsider. Form 144 Real Brokerage Inc Filed by Poleg Tamir A 10b5-1 plan is a prearranged selling schedule insiders set up in advance to avoid trading on nonpublic information. The defense cites the plan as evidence that the sale was routine.
In a company-wide email on January 23, 2026, Poleg acknowledged a “brief relationship” with an agent who later filed for divorce, saying it began only after he separated from his own spouse and ended “nearly a year ago.” He called the lawsuit’s claims meritless and “filled with inaccuracies,” and described the suit as “a clear attempt to exploit my public standing for personal reasons.”3The Real Deal. Real CEO Tamir Poleg Admits to Agent Relationship After Lawsuit Paige Steckling has also publicly distanced herself from the complaint’s account, stating that her marriage ended “for personal reasons” and that the claims “do not reflect the reality of those circumstances.”2New York Post. Married Real Estate Mogul Offered Subordinate Multi-Million-Dollar Indecent Proposal to Leave Her Husband
Where the Case Stands
Steckling filed originally in Utah’s Fourth Judicial District Court in Provo, Case No. 250405264. Poleg’s attorneys removed the case to federal court on November 21, 2025, invoking diversity jurisdiction: Steckling is a Utah resident, Poleg is domiciled in Israel, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.7PACER Monitor. Steckling v. Poleg The federal case is docketed as 2:25-cv-01062 before District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen, with Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero handling pretrial matters.
Poleg filed an amended counterclaim on April 30, 2026. Its substance has not been publicly reported. Steckling answered it on May 15, 2026 and then moved on June 5, 2026 for partial judgment on the pleadings to dismiss portions of it.7PACER Monitor. Steckling v. Poleg
The litigation is in discovery. Steckling filed motions in early June 2026 to compel document production and expedite discovery, with a hearing set for July 8, 2026. The scheduling order sets expert discovery and dispositive motion deadlines in January 2027. No trial date has been set.7PACER Monitor. Steckling v. Poleg
The Utah Tort at the Center of the Case
Most states abolished alienation of affection claims decades ago. Utah is one of the few that still allows them. Under Norton v. MacFarlane, decided by the Utah Supreme Court in 1991, a plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant’s conduct was the “controlling cause” of the loss of the spouse’s affection, not merely a contributing factor alongside other problems in the marriage.8Justia. Norton v. MacFarlane, 818 P.2d 8
That is a demanding standard, and it is about to get harder to meet. During the 2026 legislative session, State Sen. Todd Weiler sponsored Senate Bill 109, which declares that “there is no right of action for alienation of affections.” The bill passed both chambers and the governor signed it on March 23, 2026.9Utah Legislature. SB 109 – Alienation of Affection Amendments The law does not take effect until May 5, 2027, well after Steckling filed suit. Whether it reaches pending cases is a question the litigation may need to address.