Prince George's County Association of REALTORS®

REALTOR^® A and REALTOR^® B had been engaged in a cooperative transaction that resulted in a dispute regarding entitlement to compensation. Rather than requesting arbitration before the Board of REALTORS^®, REALTOR^® A filed suit against REALTOR^® B for payment of the compensation he felt REALTOR^® B owed him. Upon receiving notification of the lawsuit, REALTOR^® B filed a request for arbitration with the Board, which was reviewed by the Grievance Committee and found to be a mandatory arbitration situation. REALTOR^® A was advised of the Grievance Committee's decision, but refused to withdraw from the lawsuit. Thereupon, REALTOR^® B filed a complaint with the Board charging a violation of Article 17 as supported by Standard of Practice 17-1.

REALTOR^® A was directed to be present at a hearing on the complaint before the Board of Directors. Evidence that REALTOR^® B had sought REALTOR^® A's agreement to submit the dispute to arbitration was presented at the hearing. REALTOR^® A defended his action in filing the suit and refusing to submit to arbitration by asserting that under laws of the state, the Board of REALTORS^® had no authority to bar his access to the courts or to require him to arbitrate his dispute with REALTOR^® B.

The Board of Directors concluded that REALTOR^® A was correct as to his legal right and as to the Board's lack of any right to prevent him from filing a suit. It was pointed out to REALTOR^® A, however, that the Board of REALTORS^® is a voluntary organization, whose members accept certain specified obligations with respect to their relations with other REALTORS^®, and that if he wished to continue as a member of the Board he would be obliged to adhere to the Board's requirements as to arbitration.

Because REALTOR^® A would not withdraw the litigation, the Board of Directors concluded that REALTOR^® A was in violation of Article 17 for refusing to arbitrate in a mandatory arbitration situation. However, it was noted that if REALTOR^® A had filed litigation against REALTOR^® B, and had REALTOR^® B then requested arbitration with the Grievance Committee determining that an arbitrable issue of a mandatory nature existed, REALTOR^® B might have successfully petitioned the court to remand the matter to the Board for arbitration, and there would have been no finding of a violation of Article 17 since the Board's arbitration process would have been ultimately complied with.