Wang v. National Association of Realtors
- Robert Lehrburger
- 1:24-cv-02371
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Wang v. National Association of Realtors, Judge Lehrburger continued the stay while the Burnett settlement appeal proceeds.
Hao Zhe Wang and the defendants in this action, including the four Moving Defendants, are affected because the case is paused pending the Burnett appeal or another court order.
What happened
In Wang v. National Association of Realtors, the defendants asked the court to continue pausing the case while an appeal proceeds in Burnett v. NAR, a nationwide class action in which Wang is a class member.
Wang argued that his claim was different from the claims covered by the Burnett settlement and that the stay would delay his case. The court said the settlement covers certain home purchases on multiple-listing services nationwide and that the Burnett court retained authority to interpret and enforce the settlement. The court also rejected Wang’s argument concerning whether he knew that two defendants had joined the settlement.
Judge Lehrburger granted the defendants’ requests, continued the stay pending the Burnett appeal or another court order, and directed the clerk to terminate the related letter motions.
The detailed version
- Wang v. National Association of Realtors · No. 1:24-cv-02371
- Robert Lehrburger
- Jan. 23, 2025
Background
The order resolves motions by the National Association of Realtors, Halstead Manhattan, LLC, Brown Harris Stevens Residential Sales, LLC, and Real Estate Board of New York, collectively called the Moving Defendants. They asked the court to continue a temporary stay—that is, a pause in the case—pending further developments in Burnett v. NAR, a nationwide class action in which Wang is a class member. More specifically, they requested a continued stay while Wang’s appeal of the order approving the Burnett settlement and the resulting judgment was pending.
The parties’ arguments
The Moving Defendants argued that continuing the stay would avoid inefficient and burdensome piecemeal litigation while the appeal was pending. The court noted that other similar cases had also been stayed. The parties had not identified concerns for non-parties. Wang identified delay in prosecuting his case as the prejudice from a continued stay.
Wang argued that, as a direct purchaser of real property, his claim was distinct from and not covered by the Burnett settlement. The court disagreed that this argument justified lifting the stay. It pointed to the Burnett settlement’s stated coverage of transactions in which settlement-class members sold or purchased a home on a multiple-listing service nationwide. The Burnett judgment also barred class members who did not opt out from pursuing released claims against released parties and gave the Burnett court continuing and exclusive authority over issues including the settlement class, released claims, and released parties.
Wang also argued that the stay should not apply to Halstead and another defendant referred to in the opinion as “BRS” because he allegedly did not know they had joined the settlement when he objected to it. The Moving Defendants disputed that assertion, pointing to a public docket filing made before Wang filed his objection.
Ruling
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger granted the requests to continue the stay. The action is stayed pending determination of the Burnett appeal or another order from the court. The clerk was directed to terminate the letter motions at Docket Entries 88 and 89. The order did not decide the underlying claims in Wang’s case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.