CourtListener 3206729•Superior Nissan of Conway v. Dir.
Testo completo
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 278
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION IV
No. E-16-82
OPINION DELIVERED MAY 25, 2016
SUPERIOR NISSAN OF CONWAY
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
V. BOARD OF REVIEW
[NO. 2015-BR-02566]
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
WORKFORCE SERVICES, and
LONNY AGEE
APPELLEES APPEAL DISMISSED
ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Chief Judge
Appellant Superior Nissan of Conway appeals from the Arkansas Board of Review’s
January 25, 2016 decision reversing the Appeal Tribunal and finding that the claimant Lonny
Agee was entitled to benefits. We dismiss due to a lack of jurisdiction.
On February 11, 2016, Superior Nissan of Conway filed its petition for appeal with
this court. The petition was signed by D’Mar Phillips, the human resources director for
appellant. It is well-settled law that corporations must be represented by licensed attorneys.
Smithco Invs. of W. Memphis, Inc. v. Morgan Keegan & Co., Inc., 370 Ark. 477, 261 S.W.3d
454 (2007). Our supreme court has held that where a party not licensed to practice law in
this state attempts to represent the interests of others by submitting himself or herself to the
jurisdiction of a court, these actions, such as the filing of pleadings, are rendered a nullity.
Id. Here, Phillips is not an attorney and may not represent Superior Nissan of Conway in
this case. Id. Our case law makes it clear that invoking the process of a court of law
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 278
constitutes the practice of law. Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617. Because
Phillips was practicing law when he signed the petition, the petition is null and void.
Therefore, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
KINARD and GRUBER, JJ., agree.
No briefs.
2
Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.