Суд отказал Better.com в запрете действий экс-гендиректора, а в Миннесоте утвердили новые соглашения по делу NAR

Editor’s note: The COURT REPORT is RISMedia’s weekly look at current and upcoming lawsuits, investigations and other legal developments around real estate. Better.com ’s restraining order against former CEO denied In a continuation of the legal battle between tech-focused mortgage disruptor Better.com and its recently ousted Founder and CEO Vishal Garg, a restraining order from the company was recently denied by a judge. U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett of the federal Southern District of New York denied Better’s motion for a restraining order to block what it called a “scorched-earth campaign” by Garg, ruling that the company did not “demonstrate irreparable harm” was done to them by Garg. Better had argued in its motion for the restraining order that Garg “assembled a group of shareholders to act together to carry out his self-serving agenda,” according to the complaint, in violation of securities laws. In her ruling, Garnett stated that to prove Better would likely suffer irreparable harm, the company “must demonstrate an injury that is neither remote nor speculative, but actual and imminent.” Both sides are now vigorously lobbying shareholders to support their plans, with social media barbs and appeals for their respective plans to turn the company around. Gibson settlements upheld Only a few weeks after the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled to uphold NAR’s settlement in the landmark Burnett commission lawsuit, the same court has now ruled to uphold the several settlements made in the copycat lawsuit known by the name of Gibson. The challengers to the settlements had previously claimed that said settlements “exceeded” the scope of certified classes, and the amounts settled were “grossly disproportionate” to what was adequate, along with other technical and legal arguments as they urged the appellate judges to carve out exceptions or overturn lower court rulings. In the Eighth Circuit’s opinion, judges affirmed the Gibson settlements for similar reasons as they did the Burnett settlement, referring to the recent judgment several times throughout. The judges additionally affirmed in the Burnett filing that “practice changes address the challenged rules and attempt to remediate the harm” caused by “inflated home prices.” “The plaintiffs in Burnett challenged the NAR rule in a class action and won at trial. A major settlement followed where the district court expanded the class nationwide and released claims from similar copycat lawsuits. We affirmed the district court’s approval of that settlement.” The many claims made by the challengers involving the Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY) and how claims from buyers and sellers could not be brought together under the settlements due to the differences in transactions were all refuted by the judges of the Eighth Circuit. Zillow faces harassment and discrimination lawsuit from former employee A former Zillow employee is suing the portal giant for harassment and employment discrimination, alleging the company fired him after he took medical leave, further claiming he developed serious mental health issues due to what he described as abuse by a supervisor, including extensive “age-based mockery.” The employee, Kenn Brantley, is in his early 40s and according to his social media profiles, worked on Zillow’s sales team. In a complaint filed last month in Colorado federal court, he accused his direct supervisor, Jonathan Ney of “ongoing and recurring” inappropriate behavior, including comments about Brantley’s baldness. Brantley also said he was “passed over” by Zillow for multiple promotions despite allegedly being a top performer, and claimed that management selected “a candidate of a different race and/or sex” (Brantley is white and male). A colleague allegedly told Brantley that Ney was actively blocking his promotion, but Brantley also claimed another Zillow higher up manager said in a meeting that he wanted to change the “demographic composition” of his team away from “white males.” Brantley eventually was eventually given what he called a “pretextual” warning that his job was in jeopardy due to poor performance, after bringing complaints to HR and posting internally about the alleged harassment, he said. He subsequently suffered a panic attack, according to the lawsuit, and took medical leave. Zillow fired him the day after he returned, the lawsuit claims. Brantley is seeking damages (with compensatory damages capped at $300,000, along with unspecified punitive penalties), back pay and reinstatement under discrimination and hostile workplace laws. Zillow has declined to comment on the lawsuit, citing internal personnel matters. Side agent sued for practicing law without a license An agent from the real estate startup Side is facing a lawsuit for allegedly practicing law without a license. The lawsuit was filed by a debt collector named Green Matrix Securities, who claims that Marjorie Scholtz, a licensed California real estate agent who also founded rent-to-own platform Verbhouse, represented the debtor without a law license. The suit claims that Scholtz illegally operated as a lawyer in order to secure listing contracts, further claiming that this “ongoing and systematic” practice represents a failure by Side in its legal, supervisory responsibilities. This claim includes Scholtz allegedly filing papers in state superior court and providing legal advice, as she allegedly sought to sell the house that Green Matrix wanted a lien against.  “On August 17, 2026, Scholtz stood and presented an argument for (the debtor) in…San Francisco Superior Court, and was admonished by the court as not being a legal representative,” the lawsuit claims. Scholtz also prepared other “meritless” legal documents. Scholtz’s license was transferred from Side to a company called Empress Real Estate two days after the lawsuit was filed, according to the California Department of Real Estate. Green Matrix is asking for a court order to prevent any further fraudulent legal representation by or advice by Scholtz, and “disgorgement of Defendants’ ill-gotten gains,” along with attorney’s fees.