Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1981 )

The Attorney General of Texas November 19, 1981 --- This Or;nion MARK WHITE l Aiiirms Oninkm I Attorney General 1-_-_ #...@!&&L 1 Honorable Henry Wade Opinion No. MW-392 Supreme Court Building P. 0. BOX 1254a Criminal District Attorney Austin. TX. 78711 Condemnation Section Re: Representation of corpora- 512/475-2501 Sixth Floor, Records Building tions by non-attorneys in small Telex 9104874-1367 Dallas, Texas 75202 claims court Telecopier 512M754266 Dear Mr. Wade: 1M)7 Main St.. Suite 1400 Dallas. TX. 75201 You ask for a re-examination of our conclusion in Attorney 214n428944 General Opinion MU-312 (1981). In this opinion, we concluded that a corporation must be represented by an attorney in county court or 4824 Albefla Ave.. SUite 160 county court at law in cases involving an appeal to that court from El Paso. TX. 79905 the small claims court. Attorney General Opinion H-538 (1975) 9151533-3464 concluded that a non-lawyer could represent a corporation in small claims court. This result was based on the specific statutory language of section 2 of article 2460a, V.T.C.S., as well as the 1220Dallas Ave.. Suite 202 Hou?~ton.TX. 77002 policies underlying the small claims court statute. Attorney General 7136500666 Opinion MW-312 (1981) found no statutory authority for a non-lawyer to represent a corporation on appeal from the small claims court to the county court. Section 12 of article 2460a. the statute governing the 806 Broadway. Suite 312 small claims court. provides that a party could appeal to the county Lubbock. TX. 79401 Msl747+238 court or county court at lav “in the same manner as is now provided by statute for appeals from the justice court to the County Court.” Thus, Attorney General Opinion HW-312 concluded that the trial de nova 4302 N. Tenth. Suite 0 in county court would be governed by Rule 7 of the Texas Rules of McAllen. TX. 78501 Civil Procedure, which permits individuals, but not corporations. to 3126824547 represent themselves in court. Globe Leasing, Inc. v. Engine Supply and Machine Service, 437 S.W.Zd 43 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [lst 2W Main Plaza, Suite UXJ Diat.] 1969, no writ). San Antonio. TX. 78205 51212254191 You suggest that section 13 of article 2460a should require a different result. This statute provides in part: The trial on appeal shall be de nova. but no further pleadings shall be required and the procedure shall be the same as that her= prescribed for the Small Claims Court. (Emphasis added). We do not believe this language authorizes a non-attorney to represent ~a corporation in the trial de nova In county court on appeal from the p. 1333 r, l I .v, Honorsble Henry Wade - Page 2 (Mu-392) small claims court. Section 2 of article 2460a, V.T.C.S., the statutory basis for the non-lawyer’s appearance In small claims court, provides for the jurisdiction of the small claims court. Section 2 does not establish procedure to be followed in the trial de nova on appeal. See Bvke v. City of Corpus Christi. 569 S.W.Zd 927, 931 (Tex. Clv. App. -Corpus Christi 1978, writ ref’d n.r.e.). In our opinion, “procedure” in the context of section 13 refers to pleadings, evidence, and the judge’s role in the trial. .V.T.C.S. art. 2460a. 517. 9. 11. It does not determine who can practice in county courts. As we concluded in Attorney General Opinion MW-312. a corporation must be represented by an attorney in county court or county court at law in cases involving an appeal to that court from the small claims court. SUMMARY A corporation must be represented by an attorney in county court or county court at law in cases involving an appeal to that court from the small claims court. Section 13 of article 2460a. V.T.C.S., does not require a contrary result. A Attorney General of Texas JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General RICHARD E. GRAY III Executive Assistant Attorney General Prepared by Susan L. Garrison Assistant Af?torney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Susan L. Garrison. Chairman James Allison Jon Bible Rick Gilpin Jim Moellinger p. 1334