houses for case study

Cookie banner

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy . Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use , which became effective December 20, 2019.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.

Share this story

The Case Study houses that made Los Angeles a modernist mecca

Mapping the homes that helped to define an era

Los Angeles is full of fantastic residential architecture styles, from Spanish Colonial Revival to Streamline Moderne. But the modernist Case Study Houses , sponsored by Arts & Architecture and designed between the 1940s and 1960s, are both native to Southern California and particularly emblematic of the region.

The Case Study series showcased homes commissioned by the magazine and designed by some of the most influential designers and architects of the era, including Charles and Ray Eames, Richard Neutra, and Pierre Koenig. The residences were intended to be relatively affordable, replicable houses for post-World War II family living, with an emphasis on “new materials and new techniques in house construction,” as the magazine’s program intro put it.

Technological innovation and practical, economical design features were emphasized—though the homes’ scintillating locations, on roomy lots in neighborhoods like Pacific Palisades and the Hollywood Hills , gave them a luxurious allure.

With the help of photographer Julius Shulman , who shot most of the homes, the most impressive of the homes came to represent not only new styles of home design, but the postwar lifestyle of the booming Southern California region.

A total of 36 houses and apartment buildings were commissioned; a couple dozen were built, and about 20 still stand in the greater Los Angeles area (there’s also one in Northern California, a set near San Diego, and a small apartment complex in Phoenix). Some have been remodeled, but others have been well preserved. Eleven were added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2013.

Here’s a guide to all the houses left to see—but keep in mind that, true to LA form, most are still private residences. The Eames and Stahl houses, two of the most famous Case Study Houses, are regularly open to visitors.

As for the unconventional house numbering, post-1962 A&A publisher David Travers writes that the explanation is “inexplicable, locked in the past.”

Case Study House No. 1

J.R. Davidson (with Greta Davidson) designed this house in 1948 (it was actually his second go at Case Study House No. 1). It was intended for “a hypothetical family" with two working parents and was designed to require "minimum maintenance.”

• Open in Google Maps

Case Study House No. 2

Case Study House No. 2 was designed in 1947 by Sumner Spaulding and John Rex. Arts & Architecture wrote that the home’s layout “achieves a sense of spaciousness and flexibility,” with an open living area and glass doors that lead out to adjoining terraces.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Oct 28, 2018 at 1:07am PDT

Case Study House No. 7

Case Study House No. 7 was designed in 1948 by Thornton M. Abell. It has a “three-zone living area,” with space for study, activity, and relaxation/conversation; the areas can be separated by sliding panels or combined.

Eames House (Case Study House No. 8)

Legendary designer couple Charles and Ray Eames designed the Eames House in 1949 and even Arts & Architecture seemed kind of blown away by it. The home is built into a hillside behind a row of Eucalyptus trees on a bluff above Pacific Palisades. It's recognizable by its bright blue, red, and yellow panels. The Eameses lived in the house until their deaths. It’s now open to visitors five days per week, though reservations are required.

Entenza House (Case Study House No. 9)

The Entenza House was built in 1949 and designed by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen for Arts & Architecture editor John Entenza. According to the magazine, “In general, the purpose was to enclose as much space as possible within a reasonably simple construction.”

Case Study House No. 10

Case Study House No. 10 was designed in 1947 by Kemper Nomland. The house is built on several levels to mold into its sloping site. Recently restored, the home sold to Kristen Wiig in 2017.

Case Study House No. 15

Designed by J.R. Davidson in 1947, Case Study House No. 15 has south walls made of huge glass panels. Its flagstone patio and indoor floor are at the same level for that seamless indoor-outdoor feel. According to the magazine, the floorplan “is basically that of another Davidson house, Case Study House No. 11,” which has been demolished.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Nov 15, 2018 at 6:13am PST

Case Study House for 1953

Craig Ellwood’s Case Study House for 1953 is usually numbered as 16 in the Case Study series . It has a modular steel structure and “the basic plan is a four-foot modular rectangle.” But the interior walls stick out past the exterior walls to bring the indoors out and the outdoors in. The Bel Air house hit the market in November with a $3 million price tag.

Case Study House No. 17 (A)

Case Study House No. 17 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1947. A tight budget kept the house at just 1,560 square feet, “but more space was gained through the use of many glass areas.” The house also has a large front terrace with a fireplace that connects the indoor living room fireplace. The house has been remodeled .

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Case Study House #17, 1947 (@casestudy17) on Jun 11, 2016 at 2:20pm PDT

Case Study House No. 17 (B)

Case Study House No. 17 (B) was designed in 1956 by Craig Ellwood, but “governed by a specific program set forth by the client.” Ellwood took into account the clients' collection of contemporary paintings and made the living room “purposely undersized” to work best for small gatherings. The house was extensively remodeled in the sixties by Hollywood Regency architect John Elgin Woolf and his partner, interior designer Robert Koch Woolf.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by BAUKUNST™ El Arte de Construir (@i_volante) on Aug 13, 2017 at 4:42pm PDT

West House (Case Study House No. 18 [A])

Case Study House No. 18 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1948. The house is oriented toward the ocean, but set back from the cliff edge it sits on to avoid noise issues. As A&A says, "High above the ocean, the privacy of the open south and east exposures of Case Study House No. 18 can be threatened only by an occasional sea-gull." The house features a "bricked garden room" separated from the living room by a two-sided fireplace.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by CaseStudyHouse18A (@casestudyhouse18a) on Oct 6, 2018 at 8:44pm PDT

Fields House (Case Study House No. 18 [B])

Case Study House No. 18 (B) was designed by Craig Ellwood in 1958. Ellwood didn’t attempt to hide that the house was prefabricated (the magazine explains that he believed “that the increasing cost of labor and the decline of the craftsman will within not too many years force a complete mechanization of residential construction methods”). The components of the house, however, are “strongly defined with color: ceiling and panels are off-white and the steel framework is blue.” According to A&A' s website, the house has been remodeled.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by MCM Daily (@dc_hillier) on Oct 29, 2018 at 8:32pm PDT

Case Study House No. 20 [A])

This two-bedroom house was meant “to serve young parents who find they can afford just that much,” according to architect Richard Neutra’s description. He also wrote that he used several different kinds of natural wood in the house.

Bass House (Case Study House No. 20 [B])

The Bass House was designed in 1958 by Buff, Straub, and Hensman for famed graphic designer Saul Bass. It's “unique in that it was based upon the experimental use of several prefabricated Douglas fir plywood products as part of the structural concept,” including hollow-core plywood vaults that covered the central part of the house.

Case Study House No. 21

Pierre Koenig designed Case Study House No. 21 in 1958. It was originally completely surrounded by water, with a walkway and driveway spanning the moat at the front door and carport, respectively. The house was severely messed with over the years, but restored in the ’90s with help from Koenig.

Stahl House (Case Study House No. 22)

Pierre Koenig's Stahl House , designed in 1960, is probably the most famous house in Los Angeles, thanks to an iconic photo by Julius Shulman . The house isn't much to look at from the street, but its backside is mostly glass surrounding a cliff's-edge pool. Tours are available Mondays, Wednesdays, and Friday—but book well ahead of time, as they sell out quickly.

Case Study House for 1950

The unnumbered Case Study House for 1950 was designed by Raphael Soriano. It's rectangular, with living room and bedrooms facing out to the view. However, in the kitchen and eating areas, the house “turns upon itself and living develops around a large kitchen-dining plan opening upon a terrace which leads directly into the living room interrupted only by the mass of two fireplaces.” According to A&A 's website, the house has been remodeled.

Frank House (Case Study House No. 25)

The two-story Frank House was designed by Killingsworth, Brady, and Smith and Associates in 1962 and it sits on a canal in Long Beach. A reflecting pool with stepping stones leads to its huge front door and inside to an 18-foot high courtyard. The house sold in 2015 with some unfortunate remodeling .

Case Study House No. 28

Case Study House No. 28 was designed in 1966 by Conrad Buff and Donald Hensman. According to the magazine, “the architects were asked to design a house that incorporated face brick as the primary structural material to demonstrate its particular advantages.” They came up with a plan for two symmetrical wings joined by glass galleries.

Loading comments...

Site search.

• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Archive.curbed.com
• For Sale
 in LA
• For Rent in LA
• Curbed Comparisons
• Neighborhoods
• Real Estate Market Reports
• Rental Market Reports
• Homelessness
• Development
 News
• Transportation
• Architecture


BROWSER UPDATE To gain access to the full experience, please upgrade your browser:

Southern California’s Case Study Homes Reimagined Modern Living, and Remain Relevant Today

“they introduced us to a better way of living,” one expert says, the case study houses were experiments in american residential architecture., newsletter sign-up, daily briefing.

Delivers the most important property news around the world to your inbox each weekday

On a Friday afternoon in the spring, a small group wandered below a canopy of towering eucalyptus trees in an idyllic and sun dappled Southern California yard. The Pacific Ocean below sparkled a dazzling shade of blue, birds chirped and sang overhead, and cheerful bright orange poppies blanketed a nearby hillside embankment.

The crowd was here to take a self-guided tour of the Eames House, an architectural marvel of glass and steel, built by Charles Eames and his wife, Ray, in the late-1940s. The couple moved into the property on Christmas Eve 1949, and continued to live and work there for more than a quarter century until their deaths. In 2004, the couple’s step-daughter, who then owned the house, gave it as a gift to the non-profit Eames Foundation, which she founded in part to protect it. In 2006, it was declared a National Historic Landmark.

The house, situated on a Pacific Palisades bluff, north of Santa Monica and south of Malibu, is “unselfconscious,” “created in its own little world, screened all around by trees, foliage and hills,” which serve as a “shock absorber,” according to the description of the property in the December 1945 issue of Arts & Architecture magazine. It was here that the Eames House was introduced as part of the magazine’s famed Case Study Houses program, for which publisher John Entenza commissioned major architects of the day to design and build affordable and efficient model homes meant to address the mid-century housing boom and serve as a template for how returning GIs and their families wanted to live after World War II.

Between 1945 and 1966, 36 homes were designed and 25 were built—most of them in Los Angeles. The Eames House—Case Study House #8—is one of two that has nonprofit status, and is eagerly toured by architecture buffs from around the world. The other is Pierre Koening’s iconic Stahl House—Case Study House #22—which overlooks the city’s expanse from a point of remove in the Hollywood Hills.

More : Los Angeles Case Study House Finds Buyer

Of the 23 homes that remain, three were demolished over the years, and another four were renovated past the point of recognition. The 16 Case Study Houses that remain in close-to or in their original forms, designed by architecture greats including Craig Ellwood and Richard Neutra, are owned and lived in by private individuals, and traded at a premium every time they change hands.

But why are these homes that were meant to be affordable, and cater to an average American family, now worth millions? The answer to that question is multi-layered.

There’s the architecture itself, and the style that was introduced as part of the Case Study program—modest in scale, modern and easy to live in, with a harmony between indoor and outdoor spaces, an abundance of natural light, and a type of open-floor plan that’s still in demand today.

Floor to ceiling windows in Case Study House #18.

Then there’s the land, handpicked decades ago because it was so good, with views of the ocean or mountains, flat lots, with a connection to nature, that is now near-impossible to find in an increasingly dense and urban L.A.

And finally, more than anything, they’re traded at a premium because over time, they have been elevated to become exceedingly rare classic works of art.

More : Frank Lloyd Wright’s Last Home Goes up For Auction

“This limited edition of homes will never be expanded—and will, in fact, likely diminish—because one will be destroyed somehow,” said Billy Rose, president of the L.A.-based real estate firm The Agency, who sold Case Study House #20A for $12.5 million in 2016. “There is some intrinsic value to that.”

And unlike in Europe or other parts of the world, where such rare and valued art might stay in a family for generations, in California, where the average person moves every four years, that isn’t the case, said Frank Langen, a realtor with Deasy Penner Podley, who listed Case Study House #18 in April 2018 for $10 million. “Everything is for sale in Southern California,” Mr. Langen said, "even the architecture.”

Art You Can Live In

One Case Study property that is considered functional art, not shelter, according to Mr. Rose, is Case Study House #21B, which sold in February for $3.26 million. Situated on an “A” lot in a Hollywood Hills canyon, the experimental and minimalist Pierre Koenig-designed property, which is also known as the “Walter Bailey House,” was originally designed for a childless couple, and is just 1,280 square feet.

Case Study House #21 was designed by American architect Pierre Koenig.

Added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2013, the property was bought by film producer Allison Sarofim from art gallerist P.J. Park in February. During the 12 years that Mr. Park owned the house, he occasionally used it as an outpost for his Seomi International Gallery, hosting art shows and exhibitions in the space, said Andy Butler, marketing director for Compass Realty’s Aaron Kirman Partners group, who represented the seller in this sale.

More:   British House Inspired by California Case Study Houses Hits Market

At that price—over $3 million and close to $3,000 per square foot for what is essentially a one-bedroom apartment—“it’s almost like buying a Picasso,” Mr. Butler said. “Buyers of this type of home typically have tens of millions of dollars’ worth of art in their private collection, of which this home is now part.”

As part of an art collection, owners of Case Study Homes don’t often live full-time in the property, but rather reside in a much larger space. Or if they do choose to live in it full time, it is “for a moment in their life,” Mr. Butler said. “People want to live in the art—to have parties there, and other architects come through—but they probably wouldn’t do that for any length of time because they are used to and can afford much more space.”

The Case Study Premium

Once it’s clear why Case Study Homes are worth so much, the question becomes: Are they worth more than other similar mid-century homes designed by Case Study architects because of that label? Mr. Langen, who sold a non-Case Study home designed by Craig Ellwood, would say yes—pointing to #21B as a reason why.

Known as “The Smith House,” the property that he sold this summer, was completed in 1958, and is located in the architecturally significant Brentwood community of Crestwood Hills. At 1,500 square feet, with an additional 530 square feet of outdoor deck space, it is larger than the Koenig house, yet, at $2.3 million, sold for almost $1 million less. “Mine was arguably a better house,” he said, “in a better location.” While the market did go down in the six months between the sales, at least part of the premium, he said, is based on the Case Study name.

From Penta: Maserati Plugs In, Driven by Cool Technology and European Climate Regulations

Mr. Butler agreed. “The Case Study Program name definitely adds something extra,” he said.

But sometimes, that price premium can be made less clear by outside factors, like the addition of a second home to a Case Study lot.

This happened to two of the three Case Study Homes that are located on lots adjacent to the Eames House on that Pacific Palisades bluff. For the first—Case Study House #20A, which was designed by Richard Neutra and previously owned by the late-“Simpsons” TV series co-creator, Sam Simon—there is a second, much larger (almost 9,000-square-foot) house on the lot. Mr. Rose sold the pair together in 2016 for $12.5 million, and notes that the high price wasn’t for the Neutra home alone. But the second property may have negatively impacted a price-per-square-foot premium. “The other house kind of saddled the Case Study program home,” Mr. Rose said, adding that he thinks they would have gotten a larger premium if they could have separated #20A out. “The other house just wasn’t as sympathetic, or harmonious, with the land.”

The second Pacific Palisades home with an additional much larger house on the lot is #9, which was designed by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen, and is known as the “Entenza House.” As you walk up a long driveway to the Eames House, you can see the Entenza House to your left, and the two-story Barry Berkus behemoth that was built on the lot and blocks the Case Study Home’s view. Together, the pair sold for $15.95 million in 2012.

More : How to Design an Eclectic Table That’s Ideal for Entertaining

“If you’re studying architecture, you learn about the Eames House, which is timeless, and perfectly integrates the home with nature,” Mr. Langen said. “But then right next to it is the Berkus house, which is the only home on that plot that you can see from down on the beach. It serves as a sort of antithesis to the Case Study program.”

The final Pacific Palisades lot houses Case Study House #18. This Rodney Walker-designer property, known as “West House,” was listed in April 2018 for $10 million, and is currently being leased by a long-term renter for $20,000 per month.

Case Study House #18 was listed for $10 million.

At just over 1,700 square feet, #18 is somewhat larger than the other Case Study Homes. But the current $20,000 per month lease price is significantly higher than what it is worth, Mr. Langen said, adding that, “if it wasn't a Case Study house, there is no reason it should rent for more than $7,000 per month.” Even if you tack on an extra $5,000 per month for the exquisite ocean views, that still leaves $8,000 per month left of value that in part can be attributed in part to the Case Study name.

When it was listed for $10 million, Mr. Langen said much of that cost was for the land, as there is plenty of room to build on the half-acre lot. But because #18 is landmarked and can’t be torn down, Mr. Langen said he has to wait for the right buyer. “Design sensibility and money don’t always go hand in hand,” he said. “It’s definitely a small market.”

More : A Guide to the Season’s New Developments

Case Study House #18's current lease price is significantly higher than what it is worth, according to the property's listing agent.

An Enduring Legacy

While Case Study Homes are rare, and the ones that remain no longer cater to the “average American,” for which they were intended, their impact on affordable housing, private buildings and public community spaces is clear, said architect Michael Bohn, senior principal and design director at Studio One Eleven, a Southern California-based firm known for progressive, urbanist architecture.

“That first group of Case Study architects established the outdoors as being important on both a city-scale and an individual building-scale,” he said, “which has been embraced by architects everywhere.”

When trying to address the affordable housing problem in Southern California by building more dense, mixed-use projects, architects know that it’s important to have, “ample daylight and connectivity to the outdoors—if not through a private yard, then through a private courtyard, that a lot of people can use at one time,” he said. “All of our projects embrace the ideas of community and authenticity and indoor-outdoor harmony.”

Additionally, as was the impetus of the Case Study Homes, affordability is often pursued by using new materials and new construction technologies, such as shipping containers, modular housing and new types of timber construction, as glass and steel were first used in residential design as part of the post-World War II program.

More : 8 Mid-Century Modern Furniture Finds to Add Retro Style to Your Space

Beyond affordable housing, the principles of modernism introduced by the Case Study program, including the push to strip away the unnecessary and ornamental, including baseboards and moldings that you might find in “Old World” homes, like Tudors, and Mediterraneans, and focus on building homes that are functional and utilitarian, has also endured at all price points.

“If you drive through Palm Springs or the Bird Streets in Beverly Hills today, you see the effect of the Case Study Houses everywhere,” Mr. Butler said.

Mr. Rose agreed. “I typically get three to six calls every year from real estate agents who say, ‘I’ve got a client looking for a Case Study Home. Do you know anyone building one?’” he said, with a laugh. “But what their client is really looking for is a contemporary or modern home with indoor-outdoor harmony.”

Seventy years after their introduction, “Case Study” is now shorthand for that, Mr. Rose said, and for good reason. “They introduced us to a better way of living,” he said, “and a much better lifestyle.”

Related Stories

Australia’s latest luxury condos, from the gold coast to the capital, a japanese escape, the priciest home listing in kansas and more, brisbane, australia, mansion hits the market vying for a price record.

Read Next Story

Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Pierre Koenig | Website | 1960 | Visitor Information

1635 Woods Drive , West Hollywood 90069, United States of America

The Stahl House by Pierre Koenig (also known as Case Study House #22) was part of the Case Study House Program, which produced some of the most iconic architectural projects of the 20th Century. The modern residence overlooks Los Angeles from the Hollywood Hills. It was completed in 1959 for Buck Stahl and his family. Stahl envisioned a modernist glass and steel constructed house that offered panoramic views of Los Angeles when he originally purchased the land for the house in 1954 for $13,500. When excavation began, he originally took on the duties of both architect and contractor. It was not until 1957 that Stahl hired Pierre Koenig to take over the design of the family’s residence. The two-bedroom, 2,200 square foot residence is a true testament to modernist architecture and the Case Study House Program. The program was set in place by John Entenza and sponsored by the Arts & Architecture magazine. The aim of the program was to introduce modernist principles into residential architecture, not only to advance the aesthetic but to introduce new ways of life, both stylistically and as a representation of modern lifestyle. Koenig was able to hone in on the vision of Buck Stahl and transform that vision into a modernist icon. The glass and steel construction is the most identifiable trait of the house’s architectural modernism, however, way in which Koenig organized the spatial layout of the house, taking both public and private aspects into great consideration, is also notable. As much as architectural modernism is associated with the materials and methods of construction, the juxtaposition of program and organization are important design principles that evoke utilitarian characteristics. The house is “L”-shaped, completely separating the public and private sections except for a single hallway connecting them. The adjacent swimming pool, which must be crossed to enter the house, is not only a spatial division of public and private but it serves as the interstitial space in which visitors can best experience the panoramic views. The living space of the house is behind the pool and is the only part of the house that has a solid wall, which backs up to the carport and the street. The entire house is one large viewing box, capturing amazing perspectives of the house, the landscape, and Los Angeles. Oddly enough, the Stahl house was fairly unknown and unrecognized for its advancement of modern American residential architecture until 1960 when photographer Julius Shulman captured the pure architectural essence of the house in a shot of two women sitting in the living room overlooking the bright lights of the city of Los Angeles. That photo put the Stahl House on the architectural radar as an architectural gem hidden in the Hollywood Hills. The Stahl House is still one of the most visited and admired buildings today. It has undergone many interior transformations. Today, you will not find the same iconic 1960s furniture inside, but the architecture, the view, and the experience still remain.

Tags: Classic , Los Angeles

Information provided in part by: ArchDaily

Projects in West Hollywood

Bradbury building, caltrans district 7 headquarters, eames house, emerson college, getty center, griffith observatory, la county museum of art, petersen automotive museum, samitaur tower, sheats-goldstein residence, the broad museum, walt disney concert hall, wilshire grand.

Pierre Koenig

Stahl house.

The Case Study House Program produced some of the most iconic architectural projects of the 20th Century, but none more iconic than or as famous as the Stahl House, also known as Case Study House #22 by Pierre Koenig. The modern residence overlooks Los Angeles from the Hollywood Hills. It was completed in 1959 for Buck Stahl and his family.

Buck Stahl had envisioned a modernist glass and steel constructed house that offered panoramic views of Los Angles when he originally purchased the land for the house in 1954 for $13,500. Stahl had originally begun to excavate and take on the duties of architect and contractor; it was not until 1957 when Stahl hired Pierre Koenig to take over the design of the family’s residence.

The two-bedroom, 2’200 square foot residence is a true testament to modernist architecture and the Case Study House Program. The program was set in place by John Entenza and sponsored by the Arts & Architecture magazine. The aim of the program was to introduce modernist principles into residential architecture, not only to advance the aesthetic, but to introduce new ways of life both in a stylistic sense and one that represented the lifestyles of the modern age.

Pierre Koenig was able to hone in on the vision of Buck Stahl and transform that vision into a modernist icon. The glass and steel construction is understandably the most identifiable trait of architectural modernism, but it is the way in which Koenig organized the spatial layout of the house taking the public and private aspects of the house into great consideration. As much as architectural modernism is associated with the materials and methods of construction, the juxtaposition of program and organization are important design principles that evoke utilitarian characteristics.

The house is “L” shaped in that the private and public sectors are completely separated save for a single hallway that connects the two wings. Compositionally adjacent is the swimming pool that one must cross in order to get into the house; it is not only a spatial division of public and private but its serves as the interstitial space that one must pass through in order to experience the panoramic views.

The living space of the house is set back behind the pool and is the only part of the house that has a solid wall, which backs up to the carport and the street. The entire house is understood to be one large viewing box that captures amazing perspectives of the house, the landscape, and Los Angeles. Oddly enough, the Stahl house was fairly unknown and unrecognized for its advancement of modern American residential architecture, until 1960 when Julius Shulman captured the pure architectural essence of the house. It was the night shot of two women sitting in the living room overlooking the bright lights of the city of Los Angeles.

Client: Buck Stahl Drawings: Adam Caruso Chair ETH Zürich Photography: Julius Shulman

• Eames Foundation

find us on:

Eames House

• Charles and Ray
• Eames House and the CSH program
• Case Study House Bluff
• Photo Gallery
• How to Visit
• Covid-19 Safety Protocols
• Guided Exterior Tour
• Group Guided Exterior Tour
• Interior Tour
• Members Appreciation Day
• Small Wedding
• Specialty Events
• Visitors Submissions
• Memberships
• Corporate Sponsorship
• 250 Year Project

Collections

• On-going Studies
• Conservation Management Plan
• Team Thanks

The Eames House, also known as Case Study House No. 8, is a landmark of mid-20th century modern architecture located in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles. It was designed and constructed in 1949 by husband-and-wife Charles and Ray Eames to serve as their home and studio. They lived in their home until their deaths: Charles in 1978 and Ray, ten years to the day, in 1988.

Charles described the house as unselfconscious . There is a sense of that “way-it-should-be-ness”. Charles and Ray designed a house specifically to meet their needs, but they were those universal needs that we all share as humans. They believed in the honest use of materials and straightforward connections. The details WERE the product!

And then by nestling the house into the hillside, rather than imposing it on the site, they realized their original intent: for the house in nature to serve as a re-orientor. The scent, the sound of birds, the shadow of the trees against the structure whether inside or out, the openness of the site—all the elements join seamlessly.

Charles said, “Just as a good host tries to anticipate the needs of his guest, so a good architect or a designer or a city planner tries to anticipate the needs of those who will live in or use the thing being designed.”

Come visit and explore how the house exemplifies many of the themes of the Eameses’ work: from furniture to exhibitions, the guest/host relationship, the iterative process that leads to meeting the need, the importance of the direct experience, the relation with nature, the life in work and work in life, the importance of details, and more. Together the structure, collections, and landscape tell the story of the couple’s approach to life and work.

The Eames House consists of two glass and steel rectangular boxes: one is a residence; one, a working studio, exploring process, materiality and color.

The Eameses looked at life as being an act of design. The residence is filled with the “stuff” of their living: the stuff that tells the story of their lives, interests and loves.

The Eames House structure and its contents are often the focus of attention, but the landscape is critical to their understanding. As Charles said, “Eventually everything connects”.

Help us share the Eameses’ joy and rigor with future visitors, so they may have a direct experience of Charles and Ray’s approach to life and work.

Search the Site

Popular pages.

• Historic Places of Los Angeles
• Important Issues
• Events Calendar

Case Study Houses

The Case Study Houses served as a blueprint and inspiration for Mid-Century homes in Southern California.

In 2013, ten Case Study House program residences were added to the National Register of Historic Places.

Relevant Places

Bailey House (Case Study House #21)

Bass House (Case Study House #20B)

Case Study House #1

Case Study House #10

Case Study House #16

Case Study House #28

Entenza House (Case Study House #9)

Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Triad (Case Study House #23A)

Triad (Case Study House #23C)

West House (Case Study House #18)

Launched in 1945 by John Entenza’s  Arts + Architecture  magazine, the Case Study House program commissioned architects to study, plan, design, and ultimately construct houses in anticipation of renewed building in the postwar years.

While the Case Study House program did not achieve its initial goals for mass production and affordability, it was responsible for some of Los Angeles’ most iconic and internationally recognized modern residences, such as the  Eames House (Case Study House #8)  by Charles and Ray Eames and the Pierre Koenig-designed  Stahl House (Case Study House #22) , famously photographed by Julius Shulman.

After a decade-long effort, L.A. Conservancy’s Modern Committee succeeded in listing ten Case Study residences on the National Register of Historic Places.

About This Issue

With an emphasis on experimentation, and a goal of promoting good, modern, affordable design for single-family homes, the program helped to disseminate the midcentury modern aesthetic through its thirty-five published plans. Of these, twenty-five houses and one apartment building were built in California and Arizona.

The program offered an unparalleled opportunity for commissions and publicity for established architects including Richard Neutra, J. R. Davidson, Sumner Spaulding, and William Wurster. It helped raise the profile of then-lesser-known designers including Craig Ellwood, A. Quincy Jones, Edward Killingsworth, Ralph Rapson, Eero Saarinen, and Raphael Soriano.

Our Position

On November 21, 2013, the  Los Angeles Conservancy Modern Committee was awarded a Governor’s Historic Preservation Award to recognize its work in nominating eleven Case Study Houses to the National Register of Historic Places.

Through the efforts of the Los Angeles Conservancy Modern Committee, eleven Case Study House residences in Los Angeles, San Diego, and Ventura counties are now recognized as nationally historic. Ten are officially listed in the National Register of Historic Places, and an eleventh was deemed eligible for listing.

Few of the Case Study Houses currently have preservation protections, and some have been demolished or significantly altered. This proactive step recognizes the eleven nominated homes and raises greater awareness about the Case Study House program while providing a historic context for future designation of the remaining eligible properties.

On May 1, 2013, the State Historical Resources Commission voted to recommend listing of ten Case Study Houses in the National Register of Historic Places.  These ten residences with certifying recommendations were submitted to the National Park Service for final review and listing by the Keeper of the National Trust.  They were formally listed on July 24, 2013.

An eleventh nominated residence, Case Study House #23A, was not formally listed because of owner objection, but it received a determination of eligibility for listing in the National Register. All eleven residences will be considered historic resources and will enjoy the same protections under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Several Case Study Houses were not included in the nomination — if they’ve been altered or demolished, or for other reasons — but with this platform in place, it will be easier for other CSH homes to be nominated in the future.

Likewise, a few CSH houses, such as the  Eames House  (CSH #8), weren’t included because they’re already individually listed.

Case Study House residences included in nomination:

Los Angeles County

• Case Study House #1 , 10152 Toluca Lake Ave., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #9 , 205 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #10 , 711 S. San Rafael Ave., Pasadena
• Case Study House #16 , 1811 Bel Air Rd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #18 , 199 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #20 , 2275 N. Santa Rosa Ave., Altadena
• Case Study House #21 , 9038 Wonderland Park Ave., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #22 , 1635 Woods Dr., Los Angeles

San Diego County 

• Case Study House #23A , 2342 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego (determined eligible)
• Case Study House #23C , 2339 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego

Ventura County

• Case Study House #28 , 91 Inverness Rd., Thousand Oaks

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

Modern California Houses Case Study Houses 1945 1962

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

6 Favorites

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

In collections.

Uploaded by ArnoldZiffel on February 8, 2023

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Case Study: Two Gables by Wheeler Kearns

The aptly named Two Gables residence in Glencoe, Illinois, might appear premeditated, but its symmetrical form emerged organically to serve ...

Parti Shot: Stacked Moor by Flavin Architects

Most homeowners feel they could benefit from just a little more space. In an older house, that need for space ...

Case Study: Old Yacht Club by Elliott Architects

There are many reasons to rescue an old building—because you have to is one of them, because you want to ...

ARCHITECTURAL INTERIORS

The aptly named Two Gables residence in Glencoe, Illinois, might appear premeditated, but its symmetrical form emerged organically to serve…

Case Study: Tudor Redux by Cohen & Hacker Architects

The 1913 Tudor Revival would need more than gallons of white paint to turn it into a welcoming, light-filled home…

Case Study: 519 Indiana by Studio 804

Urban lots are not for the faint of heart, especially when surrounded by existing dwellings that predate zoning codes. Such…

Case Study: Pointer Perch by Haver & Skolnick Architects

It’s possibly not a coincidence that this project evokes the statue of the world’s most loyal dog, Hachiko, poised forever…

RURAL / SECOND HOMES

There are many reasons to rescue an old building—because you have to is one of them, because you want to…

Case Study: Farm to Table by McInturff Architects

It turns out that a dairy barn can become a family getaway without much ado, design-wise. Consider this rural Virginia…

Case Study: Napa Residence by Nick Noyes Architecture

Designed for art collectors who split their time between Los Angeles and Napa, this project presented a puzzle familiar to…

Case Study: Spring Mill House by Robert M. Gurney, FAIA, Architect

Despite its glassy walls and an Olympic-size indoor volleyball court, Spring Mill is a house that keeps its secrets. It’s…

Case Study: Presidio Heights Residence by Nick Noyes Architecture

Not far from the Presidio—a national park and Historic Landmark District at the foot of the Golden Gate Bridge—San Francisco’s…

Case Study: West Lynn Residence by A Parallel Architecture

The sensitive renovation of a historic house can take many directions, and the possibilities are compounded when a wing is…

Case Study: The Perch by Chadbourne + Doss Architects

In the midst of Seattle’s dense Queen Anne neighborhood, the Perch forms a quiet sanctuary, floating above the street in…

ON THE BOARDS

Most homeowners feel they could benefit from just a little more space. In an older house, that need for space…

Parti Shot: Lake Tahoe Cabins by RO | ROCKETT DESIGN

Humans have a primal desire to live by the water, even if it means assuming some hardships to do so.…

Parti Shot: Rolling Hills Residence by Clayton Korte

When your site has a steep vertical rise, no part of the design or build comes easily. Brian Korte and…

Parti Shot: Tidewater House by Robert M. Gurney, FAIA

When you’re a residential architect, you’re in the business of delivering dream houses. But what happens when your clients’ dream…

Sponsored Case Study: Simple Comfort in an Oregon Home

When architect Nahoko Ueda set out to design a family home in the rolling terrain outside Salem, Oregon, her goals…

Sponsored Case Study: A Private Lake Side Retreat in Texas

When you first see the 2,600sq ft lake house in Riverside, Texas, it looks like a glass box floating on…

Sponsored Case Study: Echo Hills Residence by Robert Gurney

Architect Robert Gurney leverages a site’s steeply sloped terrain to transform a suburban Maryland home into a tranquil oasis that takes its cues from nature.

Sponsored Case Study: Sanctuary House by Tai Ikegami

When he was brought in to design a modern home in Palo Alto, California, Tai Ikegami knew he’d have to…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Broadband TV News

Independent. Since 2003

Titan OS partners with leading local European ad sales houses

March 20, 2024 13.20 Europe/London By Julian Clover

Titan says by featuring channels prominently on the homepage and seamlessly integrating broadcast and streaming feeds in the EPG it is both improving content discovery for audiences and increasing the potential reach of advertising.

“These partnerships mark a significant milestone in Titan OS’ mission to rethink TV through a win-win business model approach. For advertisers, Titan OS combines impactful, brand safe, premium ad opportunities on the big home screen with the targeting and measurement capabilities of digital”, said Tim Edwards, COO, Titan OS.

Titan holds a strategic partnership with TP Vision, the international company responsible for the design, manufacturing, marketing and sales of Philips branded TVs, Titan OS already powers Philips and AOC’s Linux 2024 Smart TVs across Europe and will be progressively rolled out to earlier models via an automatic software update.

It will also be the operating system on JVC Smart TVs in the UK throughout 2024.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

About Julian Clover

Julian Clover is a Media and Technology journalist based in Cambridge, UK. He works in online and printed media. Julian is also a voice on local radio. You can talk to Julian on Twitter @julianclover , on Facebook or by email at [email protected] .

• Logos & Pictures
• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions

Advertising

• Terms & Conditions
• Mechanical Data
• Video Services
• Central & East Europe
• Terrestrial
• Events Diary
• Submit the details of your event
• Media Meet & Greet

Connect with Us

• Hispanoamérica
• Work at ArchDaily
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Architecture News

LA’s Iconic Case Study Houses (Finally!) Make National Register

• Written by Karissa Rosenfield
• Published on August 22, 2013

Ten of Los Angeles ’ Case Study Homes have been deemed historically significant an worthy of being included on US’s National Register of Historic Places . Despite the Los Angeles Conservancy’s belief that all of them deserve “equal preservation protections,” the 11th home was not included due to “owner objection.”

The Case Study Houses spawned from a post-WWII residential experiment, presented by the Arts & Architecture magazine in 1945, which introduced modern movement ideas for affordable and efficient housing. The homes - designed by the likes of Richard Neutra, Charles and Ray Eames, Pierre Koenig, Eero Saarinen and others - redefined the modern home. And, with the help of Julius Shulman, placed Los Angeles as an epicenter for mid-century modernism.

The 11 homes included on the register are:

Los Angeles County Case Study House #1, 10152 Toluca Lake Ave., Los Angeles Case Study House #9, 205 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles Case Study House #10, 711 S. San Rafael Ave., Pasadena Case Study House #16, 1811 Bel Air Rd., Los Angeles Case Study House #18, 199 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles Case Study House #20, 2275 N. Santa Rosa Ave., Altadena Case Study House #21, 9038 Wonderland Park Ave., Los Angeles Case Study House #22, 1635 Woods Dr., Los Angeles

San Diego County Case Study House #23A, 2342 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego (determined eligible) Case Study House #23C, 2339 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego

Ventura County Case Study House #28, 91 Inverness Rd., Thousand Oaks

A selection of photos from the Case Study Homes can be found here .

References: LAist , Curbed Los Angeles

• Sustainability

世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!

想浏览archdaily中国吗, you've started following your first account, did you know.

You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

The Bombshell Case That Will Transform the Housing Market

After several lawsuits brought by home sellers, the rules around buying and selling properties are about to change..

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

Today, a bombshell legal settlement reached a few days ago is about to change almost everything about buying and selling a home and in the process make it significantly cheaper. My colleague Debra Kamin explains.

[THEME MUSIC]

It’s Wednesday, March 20.

Hi, Michael.

What a treat.

Talk about this is surreal. Want me just to go?

No, I’m going to ask you a question.

This is a conversation.

Hey, I came ready to roll. What do you want from me?

So, Debra, at the highest possible level, what just happened to American real estate?

Michael, there’s been this invisible hand that’s been guiding and controlling the real estate industry for over 100 years. And they have long thought that they were absolutely untouchable because they had so much power, so much influence, so much money. And the biggest crack in their armor that’s ever happened just happened on Friday.

Hmm. Well, what is this crack in the armor, and I guess who even is this nefarious-sounding group that you’re talking about?

The group is the National Association of Realtors. Nearly 9 out of 10 home sales are handled by real estate agents affiliated with NAR. And the crack in the armor is that they have had these rules that have controlled how much buyers and sellers pay to their agents and how you work with agents to get a home on the market.

And then last week, for the first time in its history, NAR’s control over this huge industry basically collapsed, and with it so did many of the costs it was imposing on consumers.

OK, this sounds huge. I think we need to slow this whole thing down. And I think the way to do that is to have you tell us the story of how the National Association of Realtors, which is not at all a household name, became such a powerful force in the ritual of buying and selling a home in the United States.

The NAR is huge. Over their existence, they have grown to 1.5 million members. More importantly, they’ve created a system where you really cannot sell a house unless you’re a member. They even own the copyright to the word “realtor.”

They own the copyright to the word “realtor“?

They own the copyright. They even had a campaign a couple of years ago to convince people how to say it properly and correctly. They take this very seriously.

OK, OK. I’ll buy it. How do you say it properly?

It’s “reel-tor,” “reel-i-tor.”

“Reel-tor.”

Two syllables, not three.

Very important.

Extremely important.

So I should say, on paper, you can sell a house if you’re not a realtor, if you’re just a real estate agent and not a member of NAR. Exactly. But in practice, it’s really not that easy because of the system they’ve created. They make it very difficult.

For example, if you want to list a home for sale, you have to put it on something called an MLS, a multiple listing service. And MLSes, for the most part, are owned and operated by the local subsidiaries of NAR.

They control the databases in which homes basically enter the market.

Exactly. And not only the databases in which homes enter the market but the databases through which realtors tell each other how much commission they will get paid if they sell those homes. And the databases are very important because databases are where real estate agents’ can see how much commission they will make if they bring a buyer or they sell a home.

Typically when you sell a house in the US, you pay a commission fee. It’s usually around 5 percent or 6 percent to realtors. This is how realtors are making their money. It’s what you’re paying them for everything they’re doing — listing the house, showing the house, answering all your questions.

Making improvements on the house.

Yeah, and it’s how they make a living. But it’s a very high rate. 5 percent or 6 percent is one of the highest rates in the world. Almost no other developed country has a rate that high.

OK, and let’s talk about 6 percent for just a minute. That’s a number everyone knows if you’ve ever, especially sold a home, because that’s a number you hate. You hate the fact, no offense to realtors, that you have to give 6 percent of the money you get for your home to a real estate agent.

Right. Well, two real estate agents.

Because it gets split. Half goes to the seller agent. Half goes to the buyer agent.

Right. And just to put it in perspective, because I think it’s useful, if you’re selling $1 million house, 6 percent fee is $60,000. If you’re selling a half million dollar house, it’s $30,000. Either way you slice it, it’s a lot of money to put in somebody else’s pocket for a huge investment that you made.

You’re trying to get the money into your pocket, but it’s coming out of your pocket and going to the agent. Exactly.

You’re saying the National Association of Realtors should be seen as essentially the force behind that 6 percent fee, the loathed 6 percent fee staying what it has been for so long.

NAR will say we never set 6 percent. We don’t have 6 percent set in stone. That is true. But they created rules that led to a system where that 6 percent has become the industry standard, and anyone trying to challenge it, their business model has fallen apart.

Fascinating.

And here’s how they control the market. For example, if you’re a real estate agent and you want to open that home for a customer, in most markets, NAR controls the lockboxes that you use to open the homes. Everyone knows what those lock boxes look like, with little punch key. NAR actually owns one of the two companies in America that makes those lock boxes.

And in many markets, they require their agents to use their own technology. And then let’s say you open the home, you bring a buyer, you want to sell the home. The actual technology that you use to sell the home, which is DocuSign, they own a controlling stake in that company.

So every aspect of the home-selling transaction, from the very beginning to the very end, that hand of NAR is guiding it and behind it, and it’s been there for a hundred years.

Wow. I mean that sounds an awful lot like monopolistic level of power.

The word “monopoly” gets thrown around all the time when critics are talking about NAR. Another word that comes up a lot is the word “cartel.” There’s a lot of power. There’s a lot of control. And there’s also a very organized drive to go after anyone who tries to challenge them.

Hmm. This is just not a level of influence that I associate with a trade group. I think of trade groups as gathering people together for professional development.

Yeah, Having a happy hour at the hotel.

Networking.

Not controlling A to Z elements of the industry. If there was an NAR in journalism, it sounds like they would control the printing presses. How is it possible that no private company has come along and tried to break into this NAR-controlled market or that the government hasn’t looked at it and thought cartel, monopoly, we got to bust this up?

People have definitely tried. So it’s not that it’s people have not tried. The challenge is that NAR, because they have so much power, they have quashed any attempts at challenging them.

They sue the heck out of anybody who comes after them. There have been upstart companies that have tried to advertise homes outside of these multiple listing services the NAR controls. And NAR has sued them, and then you get buried in tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees. For an upstart tech company, that’s a death blow.

Mm-hmm. What about the government?

The government has also been going after NAR for more than 20 years. The DOJ and NAR have been locked in a battle back and forth since 2005. But in terms of the government, NAR is not just a trade organization. They are also a political action committee.

They have the largest PAC in Washington in terms of dollars raised, and they give millions of dollars to candidates who are in line with their agenda. And they spend millions of dollars fighting candidates who are not in line with their agenda.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

So anyone in the government who wants to go after NAR knows that they are fighting a battle that probably is bigger and more moneyed than they really want to deal with.

Right. Sounds a little bit like another Washington organization with a similar acronym which is the NRA, the National Rifle Association, which has kept a very strong lid on efforts to challenge its authority with campaign dollars.

There is a playbook for this sort of behavior, and it is followed pretty clearly.

Right. But I don’t think any of us quite understood it was happening in the housing market.

Right. And at the end of the day, it wasn’t the government that brought them down. And it wasn’t a venture capital firm with a ton of money fighting them or trying to be an upstart group. It was five normal blue-collar homeowners and a personal injury lawyer from Missouri who had never dealt with the housing market before in his life.

We’ll be right back.

So, Debra, tell us about this unexpected cast of characters that ends up bringing down the National Association of Realtors.

So, Michael, in 2018-2019, there was a group of home-sellers in Missouri who had learned that they had paid pretty high fees to their real estate agents and they might have a legal case against them.

Mm-hmm. They were probably paying that standard 6 percent fee to their agents when they sold the house, right?

They were paying the standard 6 percent fee, but the key was they had not known that that fee was actually negotiable. They thought they had to pay it.

OK, here I need to pause. It is actually negotiable?

It is actually negotiable?

It is. And that’s the thing. NAR has always said, we don’t set the fees. There is no standard fee. But in practice, if consumers don’t know that the fee isn’t negotiable, and if consumers are told by their agents that they cannot negotiate the fee, that is the fee.

Hmm. OK, so these folks discover that perhaps they didn’t need to pay 6 percent and did — what do they do?

They contacted a lawyer, and they started going through the contracts that they’d signed when they sold their homes. So one of the people went back through her contract, and the contract actually said what fee do you want to pay your agent? And it said 6 percent, 7 percent, 8 percent or 9 percent.

So she did the smart thing, and she chose the lowest fee, circled 6 percent. And that’s what she paid.

Right. In other words, like a tipping machine that says 20, 22, 25 —

It’s like when you buy a coffee and the tip starts at 22 percent.

Right, right.

It’s inconceivable that there’s anything beneath that.

Or that you actually could opt out.

Someone else, he’s the son of a factory worker. He’s now the head of Mothers Against Drunk Driving in Missouri. These are really blue-collar people he was told that he was going to be charged 5.5 percent. He found out later that he was charged 6 percent. So his agent just jacked up the fee without telling him.

So all of these people realized we left money on the table at the most important financial transaction of our entire lives, and we probably have a legal claim against the institution that set the rules that made it so this was possible.

NAR. So not only are they upset that they had to pay 6 percent and they could have negotiated it and did not know, they also are realizing that they have paid the fee to the agent that’s representing the person that they’re going against in the negotiation for the home sale.

Which is the buyer.

Right. Because as you said earlier, the nature of the 6 percent fee is that it is split between the seller’s agent and the buyer’s agent, which no one really tells you or reminds you, but that’s what happens.

Because it’s all happening through a backdoor on these multiple listing sites that you can only see if you’re a real estate agent who belongs to NAR.

OK. So what ends up happening to all these sellers once they discover in their minds that they’ve been wronged and that they want to do something about it?

They hire this attorney, Michael Ketchmark. He’s a personal injury lawyer from Missouri. Pretty much nobody outside of Kansas City had heard of him until this moment. He decides he’s going to file a class action lawsuit. This is not the best time for NAR.

This is actually the moment that they were really coming onto my radar as a reporter. I had spent last summer focused on sexual harassment allegations at NAR, and I discovered that NAR’s president — his name was Kenny Parcell — had years and years of sexual harassment accusations against him that had been covered up, and women had been paid off.

And at “The Times,” we published a big exposé on those allegations at the end of August, and he stepped down two days later.

Your reporting got the head of this incredibly powerful organization to step down.

It did, and there have been other resignations since then. And that moment for NAR really put them on the world stage. Suddenly, people are aware that the leader of the organization is an alleged sexual harasser. And women who’ve been whistle blowers about the sexual harassment have been paid off.

And all of that is happening at NAR behind the scenes when this case, where they’re being accused of price-fixing ends up going to trial.

Got it. OK. So what ends up happening to this case as it moves through the legal system just as NAR’s leader has been forced out?

So the case goes forward. And NAR says, OK, we have a new president. We’re in disarray, but we are going to regroup. We’re going to fight this. We’re absolutely not going to settle.

OK. What ends up happening at this trial?

They come guns blazing, high-powered corporate lawyers, black suits, tons of money. And up against them you have Ketchmark and his team of plaintiffs. And the jury really liked what Ketchmark had to say.

A Kansas City jury found the National Association of Realtors and other organizations conspired to keep realtor commission fees high.

They agreed that these home-sellers were not told that they could negotiate the prices.

The plaintiffs argued the organizations forced home-sellers to pay both the seller and buyer fees, calling that practice wrong and illegal.

So late in October of last year, NAR is found guilty of price-fixing. And the jury came back and said, yeah, you’re guilty. And the damages are $1.8 billion. Wow.

What we proved was the National Association of Realtors has joined in a conspiracy with the two of the largest corporate real estate brokers to use the system to fix prices.

So what happens within hours of this verdict coming through is the floodgates open.

The minute that that verdict came in, we filed a lawsuit against the National Association of Realtors and these other large corporate real estate companies to bring the same relief nationwide.

Ketchmark turns around the same day that he won this case and files a national case. So we’re talking the exact same argument, but now it’s not just Missouri, it’s the whole country.

The money will be returned to the homeowners that were the victims of this rigged system. It’s been going on in our country for about a hundred years, and it stops today.

Wow. So every seller in the country.

Every single person who’s sold a home in the past four years is now part of this case if they paid a 6 percent commission and didn’t know it.

Across the country, already since that case, a case filed by buyers in Illinois, also Sellers in Missouri, New York, Texas, and South Carolina. There’s also an Illinois case that was —

Other copycat suits start happening. And within weeks, we’re up to almost 20 lawsuits against NAR, all saying, you are a monopoly, you have antitrust violations, and these rules need to change.

Been a major shakeup in the real estate world today. If a settlement is approved in court, homes may get cheaper, and agents and brokers could be out of business.

So in the face of all these lawsuits, NAR finally agrees to settle. And late last week, early Friday morning, they agreed to a settlement that includes massive changes that are going to introduce competition into the marketplace, the biggest one being the rules that led to that 6 percent commission are gone.

So is the 6 percent fee perhaps now gone?

It will. It will go away because competition is now going to enter the marketplace. And when competition comes in, people have to lower their fees as a result. A really good example, if you want to look at a precedent in history, is the travel industry.

It used to be if you wanted to book a vacation or buy a flight, you had to go through a travel agent. And you had to pay what they told you to pay. But then we had things enter the marketplace like Expedia and Kayak and Priceline. The same way we now have Zillow and Redfin, we do a lot of the searching for homes ourselves.

Just not the buying and the selling.

But the fees for searching for a home have not changed, even though the service itself has. It’s a lot cheaper now to book travel than it was when you had to go through an agent. It’s going to be a lot cheaper to book a real estate agent now as well to sell your home.

OK. I think I understand. I want to talk about what it would mean for the 6 percent commission to go away. Because as we’ve talked about previously in this conversation, that was the immovable fact of buying and selling a home and a huge amount of money.

A huge amount of money. Americans spend about $100 billion a year on real estate commissions alone.

Unbelievable.

Economists forecast that they’re probably going to see that number drop by $20 to $50 billion because these commissions are going to go down. But where it really matters is housing prices. Housing prices have become higher because real estate commissions are baked into the housing price.

If you’re selling a house and your agent says to you, when you sell this house, you’re going to have to pay a 6 percent fee, so we’re just going to bump up the price of the house by 6 percent to absorb that cost. So imagine now those fees going down across the board. That bump up is going down as Well, So housing prices are going to dip.

It’s one of the most significant changes we’ve seen to the housing industry in a hundred years.

Yeah, I mean, you think about it, if you take a 6 percent fixed fee in the system, and you get rid of it, and if you’re right, housing prices fall. What this NAR change means is that the entire US housing market is about to be discounted. It’s about to go on sale.

The prices are about to drop. Absolutely.

OK. What else does the settlement do?

The other major change is that if you are a seller’s agent and you’re listing a home for sale, you can no longer make an offer of commission to the buyer’s agents on these MLS databases. So buyer’s agents will no longer be able to say, hey, I’m only going to take people to homes where I know I’m guaranteed to get 3 percent.

OK. I want to just make sure I understand that. So in addition to this settlement essentially ending the reign of the 6 percent commission, it’s ending this informal conspiracy that’s been going on between buyer’s agents and seller agents where they wink and nod at each other and say, I’m going to get my 3 percent, you’re going to get your 3 percent. In fact, what it does is it ends the very nature of the two colluding over who’s going to get what.

There was nothing informal about it. It was happening in broad daylight on these MLSes.

Right. But of course, we weren’t on those MLSes.

We didn’t know. Exactly. And now we know.

OK, so those are two colossal changes to the market. But it leaves me with a question. This settlement sounds like it represents people who were in the class action lawsuits, but if I sold a home — I don’t know — like three or four years ago, and I look at this settlement and I say congratulations to those in it, but what about me? What about the fact that I and a million and a half other people, we paid our 6 percent fees. What’s in it for us?

Yes, Michael Barbaro, you could also make money from this settlement. And I, Debra Kamin, could also make money from this settlement.

The settlement is a global settlement. Because there were so many lawsuits going on at once, it didn’t just settle that case in Missouri with the five homeowners. It settled all of them. It’s a class action suit that applies to almost every person in America who sold a home over the last few years.

Interesting.

And over the next few years, it’s going to take a while, but we’re all going to get letters that are going to ask us, if you sold a home and if you paid commission.

And we’ve all gotten these letters, were you part of —

Did you buy a piece of meat from this supermarket on this date?

“Did you buy a piece of the housing market on this date?” is the letters we’re going to get. And depending on how many people fill out these letters and send them back, and how big that pot of money has grown to by the end of it, because there’s still some lawsuits that are simmering, that money is going to be divvied up, and parts of it are going to go to homeowners. No one’s going to get rich off of this, but yes, we all stand to get a small chunk of it.

If this is, in fact, as you’re describing it, a revolution in the American real estate industry, the downfall of NAR, the changes of all these rules, we know that revolutions can be very fast or they can be very slow. And I’m curious if you can, in your mind’s eye, imagine what the real estate market is going to look like in 5 or 10 years, and how much better or more accessible it might be for people as a result of these changes.

And I’m asking that in particular because here on “The Daily,” we’ve talked so much about how cruel the US housing market is right now. There’s a shortage. Prices are really high, and young people in particular feel completely locked out of the market. And so is this really going to do something about that? Or is it really going to only feel like it’s at the margins?

No, it will help them. But not in the clean, easy way that you may think. One of the major fallouts of this settlement is going to be the fact that NAR stands to lose something like 2/3 of its members.

Because the major reason people have stayed members of NAR is because they needed access to home listings. And they control the home listings. Now that access has been broken by the settlement deals, people are fed up with NAR. They pay hundreds of dollars a year to be a member. And now they’re saying, what do you do for me? After all this, you lost in court, and now I don’t even have access to these listings for my commission?

So when they lose 2/3 of their members, that group is now also losing 2/3 of the people who donate to their political action committee. And that lobbying arm in Washington has now been very significantly blunted, and that lobbying arm in Washington is one of the biggest forces behind pro-landlord policies, stopping things like rent control, all of the initiatives in D.C. that have made the housing market so very brutal for so many Americans.

So in the long run, this is going to have a serious impact that will completely change the dynamics of the real estate market.

So if we take the NAR out of the equation, we get a more consumer, tenant-friendly housing market. And that is very likely to happen because this settlement essentially kneecaps NAR and leaves its current members with no real incentive to stay members.

That is absolutely correct. So it’s going to take time, but there’s going to be all sorts of ripple effects from this that go well beyond $418 million.

Right. At the end of the day, Debra, this feels like the story of a monopoly that outlived all other monopolies in our system. Right? I mean, American economic history is littered with the story of industries where a group or a company have a stranglehold, and it gets broken up. That’s the idea of a fair economy.

This one lasted so long despite the fact that what it controlled was a pillar of the American dream, which is owning a home. And I wonder how you think about the fact that it took so long to do it. It genuinely shocks me, I guess I’m saying, that this dynamic lasted as long as it did.

It shocks me too. And I have to say, when I started this beat about a year ago, I didn’t know what NAR was. Most Americans had no idea that this organization had so much control and so much power over the housing market. The housing market is 20 percent of the US GDP. This is a huge organization that’s been guiding everything from the wings.

But what I love about this story is that at the end of the day, it was just five normal home-sellers who took them on in court in Kansas City and a personal injury lawyer, and they won. And that irony is not lost on the lawyer. He, after the settlement, sent me a quote. It was a David versus Goliath quote from the Bible.

That is how he sees himself. And in many ways, that is what this story is. It’s one of those stories where the little guy went up against the biggest guy there was, and they won. And a lot of regular Americans now stand to benefit from this because of its impact on the housing market.

Well, Debra, thank you very much.

Well, Michael, thank you very much.

A federal court is expected to give final approval to the NAR’s legal settlement and make it official in the coming weeks.

Here’s what else you need to know today. On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would push ahead with a planned ground invasion of the Southern Gaza City of Rafah, despite pleas for restraint from the United States, which has warned it could be disastrous for the civilians there. In remarks to his cabinet, Netanyahu acknowledged that the White House had asked him not to invade Rafah but said that he sees no way to eliminate Hamas without doing so.

Today’s episode was produced by Diana Nguyen, Shannon Lin, and Sydney Harper. It was edited by Brendan Klinkenberg and Lisa Chow, contains original music by Diane Wong, Marion Lozano, Sophia Lanman, Rowan Niemisto, and Brad Fisher, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.

• March 22, 2024   •   35:30 Chuck Schumer on His Campaign to Oust Israel’s Leader
• March 21, 2024   •   27:18 The Caitlin Clark Phenomenon
• March 20, 2024   •   25:58 The Bombshell Case That Will Transform the Housing Market
• March 19, 2024   •   27:29 Trump’s Plan to Take Away Biden’s Biggest Advantage
• March 18, 2024   •   23:18 Your Car May Be Spying on You
• March 17, 2024 The Sunday Read: ‘Sure, It Won an Oscar. But Is It Criterion?’
• March 15, 2024   •   35:20 A Journey Through Putin’s Russia
• March 14, 2024   •   28:21 It Sucks to Be 33
• March 13, 2024   •   27:44 The Alarming Findings Inside a Mass Shooter’s Brain
• March 12, 2024   •   27:30 Oregon Decriminalized Drugs. Voters Now Regret It.
• March 11, 2024   •   29:07 The Billionaires’ Secret Plan to Solve California’s Housing Crisis
• March 10, 2024 The Sunday Read: ‘Can Humans Endure the Psychological Torment of Mars?’

Hosted by Michael Barbaro

Featuring Debra Kamin

Produced by Diana Nguyen ,  Shannon Lin and Sydney Harper

Edited by Brendan Klinkenberg and Lisa Chow

Original music by Diane Wong ,  Marion Lozano ,  Sophia Lanman ,  Rowan Niemisto and Brad Fisher

Engineered by Alyssa Moxley

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music

For decades, an invisible hand has been guiding and controlling the American real estate industry, dictating how much buyers and sellers pay to their agents and how homes are sold. A few days ago, after a stunning legal settlement, that control — wielded by the National Association of Realtors — collapsed.

Debra Kamin, who reports about real estate desk for The Times, explains how the far-reaching change could drive down housing costs.

On today’s episode

Debra Kamin , a reporter on real estate for The New York Times.

Background reading

The National Association of Realtors agreed to a landmark deal that will eliminate a bedrock of the industry, the standard 6 percent sales commission.

Read about five ways buying and selling a house could change.

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Dan Farrell, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson and Nina Lassam.

A previous version of this episode described incorrectly the National Association of Realtors’ ownership of the word “realtor.” It owns the trademark of the word, not the copyright. The episode also incorrectly stated that the association had a controlling stake in the company DocuSign. It was, however, an early investor.

How we handle corrections

Debra Kamin reports on real estate, covering what it means to buy, sell and own a home in America today. More about Debra Kamin

Advertisement