Ihop 1914 v. Director, Department of Workforce Services ( 2023 )

Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 102ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. E-22-22
Opinion Delivered February 22, 2023
IHOP #1914
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
V. BOARD OF REVIEW
[NO. 2021-BR-03917]
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
WORKFORCE SERVICES
APPELLEE DISMISSED
MIKE MURPHY, Judge
Appellant IHOP #1914 (IHOP) appeals from the Arkansas Board of Review’s
December 13, 2021 decision finding that the claimant, Tanaly Godwin, was entitled to
benefits because she was discharged from last work for reasons other than misconduct. We
dismiss due to a lack of jurisdiction.
IHOP filed its petition for appeal with this court on January 10, 2022. The notice of
appeal was signed by Angela Delt. Delt is not an attorney licensed to practice in Arkansas. It
is well-settled law that corporations must be represented by licensed attorneys. Bank of
Fayetteville NA v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 96. Furthermore, our supreme court has held that
when a party not licensed to practice law in this state attempts to represent the interests of
others by submitting to the jurisdiction of a court, those actions, such as the filing of
pleadings, are rendered a nullity. Id.Here, Delt indicated on the petition for review that IHOP was not represented by an
attorney, and she signed the petition. Because Delt is not an attorney, she may not represent
IHOP in this case. Id. Our case law makes it clear that invoking the process of a court of law
constitutes the practice of law. Steel v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 377. Because Delt was practicing
law when she signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack
jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal. See Super 8 Motel v. Dir., 2019 Ark. App. 555.
Dismissed.
VIRDEN and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Tanaly Goodwin, pro se appellant.
Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, Associate General Counsel, for appellee.
2