Judge denies FTC presumption in Zillow

Judge Anthony J. Trenga of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia denied the Federal Trade Commission’s motion for partial summary judgment on July 8 in the agency’s antitrust case over Zillow’s rental-listings partnership with Redfin. The ruling means the FTC did not win an early finding that the arrangement was presumptively unlawful before trial. Court-focused reports said the case is now headed toward an Aug. 24 trial in federal court. ### What exactly did the judge refuse to do? The FTC had asked Trenga to treat the Zillow-Redfin arrangement as presumptively unlawful without waiting for a full trial record. Real Estate News reported that the judge rejected that request, saying factual disputes remained unresolved. HousingWire likewise reported that the court denied the agency’s bid for partial summary judgment rather than ending the case. (housingwire.com) July 8 matters here because the ruling was procedural, not final. The court did not dismiss the FTC’s case, and the agency can still try to prove that the deal violates antitrust law at trial. ### What is the deal the FTC is challenging? Zillow agreed in early 2025 to pay Redfin $100 million to become Redfin’s exclusive provider of multifamily rental listings, according to Real Estate News and earlier coverage of the lawsuit. (housingwire.com) The arrangement covers Redfin and its rental sites, including Rent.com and ApartmentGuide.com, those reports said. The FTC sued in September 2025, alleging the partnership removed direct competition in an already concentrated market for online apartment listings. HousingWire reported that the agency says the arrangement effectively combined two of the three largest online apartment-listing services. ### Why didn’t the FTC get the presumption it wanted? (realestatenews.com) Real Estate News reported that Trenga found key factual disputes still in play, including disputes over market definition and competitive effects. Those are central issues in antitrust cases because they go to whether the companies actually compete in the same market and whether the arrangement harms competition there. (housingwire.com) Zillow and Redfin have argued for months that the FTC defined the market too narrowly and failed to show enough market power. Earlier filings described by HousingWire said the companies contend the partnership benefits renters and property managers and expands listing distribution rather than reducing it. ### Who else is involved besides the FTC? Five state attorneys general joined the case after the FTC filed suit, according to prior reporting. (realestatenews.com) Real Estate News identified the states as Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Virginia and Washington. May 11 was another key date in the case. HousingWire reported then that the same Virginia federal court denied Zillow and Redfin’s motion to dismiss, allowing the antitrust claims to proceed into discovery and toward trial. (housingwire.com) ### Why does the August trial matter procedurally? Andrew Ferguson, the FTC chair, has said the commission will challenge mergers in federal court rather than through administrative litigation, according to the competition-policy briefing provided and contemporaneous reporting cited there. (realestatenews.com) In that setting, district-court judges become the forum for early evidentiary fights like this one. The Zillow-Redfin case is now set to test the FTC’s proof on a factual record in open court rather than on an early presumption alone. (housingwire.com) Aug. 24 is the next concrete date. HousingWire and Real Estate News both reported that trial is expected to start then in the Eastern District of Virginia, with the FTC, Zillow and Redfin set to present evidence on market definition, concentration and competitive effects. (housingwire.com)