Zillow injunction hearing opens in MRED antitrust case

In early June, Judge Tharp extended the TRO, which also prevents Zillow from banning any MRED listings from its site, until the court either rules on Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion or grants MRED’s motion to compel arbitration, which is also currently pending.

The hearing is proceeding as scheduled despite an attempt by MRED earlier this week to have the court deny Zillow’s motion prior to the start of the hearing, seeking a stay on all arbitratable matters and claiming that the injunction is unnecessary given the TRO currently in place. 

Wednesday morning’s proceedings included opening statements by all three parties and the beginning of Errol Samuelson’s, Zillow’s chief industry development officer, testimony.

Other executives expected to testify at the hearing include MRED’s managing director and chief technology officer Chris Haran, Compass regional vice president Fran Broude, Zillow’s chief financial officer Jeremy Hoffman, the broker-owner of McColly Real Estate Ron McColly, Compass CEO Robert Reffkin and MRED CEO Rebecca Jensen. In addition, there will be two expert witnesses, Lawrence Wu, the president of NERA Economic Consulting, and attorney Debra Aron, who is the vice president of Charles River Associates’ Competition Practice. 

The Zillow-Compass-MRED saga

The hearing is just one part of an antitrust lawsuit Zillow filed in mid-May, claiming that MRED and Compass conspired to withhold listing data and pressure Zillow to carry private “hidden” listings nationwide.

Zillow is arguing that MRED’s October 2025 clarification of its IDX and VOW rules to state that IDX participants may filter listings only using objective criteria, such as geography, price, property type and listing type were part of a concerted effort by the MLS and Compass to harm Zillow for its listing access standards policy, which bans listings that are publicly marketed for more than one business day prior to being available to display on IDX or VOW-powered websites. 

Courtroom action

According to sources in the courtroom Wednesday morning, in opening statements, Zillow’s counsel discussed an alleged coordinated effort by Compass and MRE to hide homes from consumers and that Compass pressured MRED to prevent Zillow from enforcing its listing access standards policy. The listing portal giant also argued that hiding listings from Zillow, the nation’s largest home search portal, harms buyers and sellers and could have an impact on housing affordability and availability. 

Sources told HousingWire that counsel for Compass and MRED claimed that Zillow’s listing access standards policy is solely focused on maintaining Zillow’s user traffic and not about market transparency and that the MLS is neutral industry infrastructure.

Counsel for MRED noted that Zillow would be able to maintain its access to MRED’s IDX listing feed if it did not enforce its listing access standards policy. The MLS’s attorney also contended that Zillow is challenging the rule because it conflicts with Zillow’s business model, and said MRED’s role is to distribute listings fairly rather than favor any one company.

As for Errol Samuelson’s testimony, a Zillow spokesperson told HousingWire that much of the testimony focused on the impact of private listing networks on buyers, sellers, agents, most brokers and the market at large. According to the spokesperson, Samuelson argued that Compass’s private listings are “false private” because they’re available for anyone to see as long as they work with a Compass agent, making it not about privacy for the seller at all.

During his time on the stand, the spokesperson said Samuelson drew a key distinction between truly private listings — which Zillow does not object to — and Compass’s “black box” Phase 1 of its three-phased marketing strategy, which publicly advertises the existence of off-market homes to allegedly lure buyers into Compass offices. 

“I cannot see those listings without in some way working with a Compass agent,” the spokesperson quotes Samuelson as saying, arguing that using private listings as a marketing hook to capture buyers is what makes Compass’s model harmful to competition and sellers alike. 

Additionally, the spokesperson said Samuelson noted that Zillow has been able to enforce its listing access standards policy everywhere else without any other MLSs cutting off its IDX feed, which Samuelson argued was evidence of MRED taking these actions on behalf of Compass. 

While no other MLS has actually shut off Zillow’s listing feed, Nashville-based MLS Realtracs had threatened to suspend Zillow’s feed if the listing portal failed to comply with the MLS’s updated IDX display rules. As of June 8, 2026, Realtracs had decided to continue distributing listings to Zillow while the two parties engaged in continued contract negotiations. 

Like MRED, Realtracs announced plans to expand nationwide after securing national listing feed agreements with Compass, as well as with United Real Estate.

Expected arguments

Prior to the start of the hearing, a Compass spokesperson told HousingWire that his firm is planning on arguing that Zillow, unlike licensed brokerages, does not compete for listings or owe fiduciary duties to consumers, yet is using its dominant home search platform to dictate how brokers market properties and restrict seller choice.

The company contends that Zillow’s Listing Access Standards harm consumers by penalizing sellers who choose lawful phased marketing strategies, hiding active MLS listings from buyers without clear disclosure, and undermining MRED’s long-standing Private Listing Network. Compass also plans to argue that Zillow profits from broker-created listing data while applying its policy inconsistently and using its market power to entrench its dominance rather than promote transparency.

“Zillow says that consumers deserve to see the full market. But it is both banning active, publicly available MLS listings from its platform and deceiving consumers by labeling those listings as not for sale,” the spokesperson said. “If Zillow were genuinely committed to transparency, every MLS listing would appear on Zillow without the deceptive features it adds.” 

In a post on its Front Porch blog prior to the start of the hearing, Zillow said that in court it would “present evidence regarding MRED and Compass conspiring to cut off Zillow’s listing feed in violation of federal antitrust law, among other allegations of wrongdoing.”

“And we will present evidence that MRED and Compass did it not to protect consumers or set neutral MLS policy, but to advance Compass’ private listing business at the expense of consumers and other MRED member brokers,” the post states.

MRED did not immediately respond to HousingWire’s request for comments regarding the start of the hearing.

Next steps

Although the court’s ruling from this hearing only pertains to Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion, a ruling could provide some insight as to which way Judge Tharp is leaning in the overall case, as part of the criteria to be awarded a preliminary injunction, Zillow must show that it is likely to prevail at trial. If the motion is denied, that would mean that Zillow was unable to meet this burden, indicating that there is a chance the defendants prevail in a trial, if Zillow does not provide stronger arguments and evidence. 

All parties must file any post-hearing briefs by July 9 and any replies to the post-hearing briefs are due by July 13. After this Judge Tharp will rule on the motion. However the ruling may take at least a few weeks if not months.