A growing coalition of U.S. states is taking aim at private settlements reached in the massive RealPage rent-fixing litigation, arguing that the deals could weaken ongoing public enforcement actions and leave renters with inadequate compensation for alleged antitrust violations.
In a new filing submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, attorneys general from the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Kentucky urged Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. to reject a series of settlements between RealPage plaintiffs and several major property-management companies.
The proposed settlements—collectively valued at $141 million—seek to resolve class-action claims that accuse the defendants of participating in a nationwide conspiracy to inflate rental prices through the use of RealPage’s revenue-management software.
Allegations of Coordinated Rent Hikes
At the heart of the lawsuit is RealPage Inc., a Texas-based property software company whose platform offers “revenue management” tools used by large landlords to set rent prices. Plaintiffs allege that the company’s algorithmic pricing software, combined with data-sharing features among property owners, effectively allowed competitors to coordinate rental prices, driving up costs for tenants across the country.
The litigation, filed in 2023, names dozens of major property management firms accused of feeding sensitive leasing and pricing data into RealPage’s system, which then generated rent recommendations based on market analytics. Critics argue that the tool diminished market competition by encouraging landlords to raise rents in tandem rather than competing to lower prices.
RealPage and the implicated property managers have denied any wrongdoing, asserting that their software uses publicly available market data to improve business efficiency and that the company’s practices are lawful.
The Contested Settlements
Among the proposed agreements is a $50 million settlement by Greystar Real Estate Partners, the nation’s largest apartment manager. Another 25 smaller property-management firms have also struck separate deals totaling roughly $91 million.
If approved, these settlements would compensate certain renters who claim they were overcharged due to the alleged rent-fixing scheme.
However, the coalition of state attorneys general argues that the deals fall short—both in financial scope and in addressing the underlying anticompetitive behavior. In their brief, the states described the monetary relief as “meager” and said the settlements could undermine ongoing state enforcement efforts that aim to impose stronger corrective measures.
Public vs. Private Enforcement Clash
The dispute underscores growing tension between private class-action settlements and public enforcement actions in complex antitrust cases. While private lawsuits can deliver faster compensation to victims, they can also, in some cases, restrict or complicate concurrent state or federal actions seeking injunctive relief or broader structural reforms.
In this case, the state attorneys general maintain that the private settlements could interfere with their ability to hold RealPage and major landlords accountable on behalf of residents in their respective jurisdictions.
Their intervention signals an increasingly assertive role for state AGs in regulating corporate data-sharing and algorithmic pricing practices—particularly as the housing affordability crisis remains a top political issue nationwide.
Defense and Plaintiff Responses
Attorneys for the settling defendants, including Greystar, have pushed back against the states’ objections. They have stated that the deals were negotiated in good faith and represent a fair resolution for affected tenants, especially given the risks and uncertainties of prolonged litigation.
They also noted that RealPage itself is not part of these settlements, meaning future proceedings could still hold the software provider accountable.
Meanwhile, class counsel Patrick Coughlin of Scott + Scott, who represents tenants in the private action, defended the settlement terms. He argued that the agreements “deliver meaningful monetary relief” to renters and should not be delayed by parallel government actions that may take years to resolve.
Ongoing Investigations and Future Trial
The RealPage litigation remains far from over. While the proposed settlements would resolve claims against certain property-management defendants, RealPage and several large landlords continue to face lawsuits from both private plaintiffs and state authorities.
A separate case brought by the District of Columbia’s attorney general is scheduled for trial in March 2027, suggesting that years of discovery and courtroom battles still lie ahead.
RealPage maintains that its software does not facilitate collusion, asserting that pricing decisions remain independent among landlords who use its tools. The company contends that its technology helps property owners respond more accurately to market conditions and that it has cooperated with investigators.
Broader Implications
The RealPage litigation is widely viewed as a test case for how courts and regulators will address algorithmic price-setting across industries. If the plaintiffs and state AGs succeed, it could reshape the legal boundaries for how software providers can use data analytics to guide pricing decisions.
The case also highlights a broader policy question: how to ensure fair housing competition in a market increasingly driven by artificial intelligence and data integration.
For tenants, the outcome could have nationwide ramifications—potentially influencing how rent prices are determined in major urban markets and whether landlords can continue to rely on centralized software systems to set pricing.
Looking Ahead
Judge Crenshaw has not yet ruled on whether the $141 million settlements will be approved. If he sides with the states, the proposed deals could be re-evaluated or renegotiated, potentially increasing pressure on RealPage and the property managers to reach more robust agreements.
Legal observers say the decision will likely set an important precedent for how courts balance private settlements against public enforcement actions in antitrust litigation involving digital platforms.
As the housing affordability crisis continues, the RealPage case stands as a crucial test of how far courts are willing to go in policing algorithmic collaboration among industry players.
For law students, attorneys, and antitrust professionals following this case, keep up with ongoing developments in litigation and regulatory responses through LawCrossing.com—your leading source for the latest legal news, career insights, and job opportunities in the evolving field of competition and housing law.