Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1975 )

February 24, 1975
The Honorable Franklin L. Smith Opinion No. H- 538
Nueces County Attorney
Nueces County Courthouse Re: May a non-lawyer
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 employee of a corporation
legally file a petition in
Small Claims Court on
behalf of the corporation?
Dear Mr. Smith:
You have requested our opinion concerning whether a non-
lawyer employee of a rorporation may legally file a petition in Small
Claims Court on behalf of the corporation.
Article 2460a. section 2, V. T. C. S., gives Small Claims Courts
jurisdiction “in all actions for the recovery of money by any person,
association of persons, corporation or by any attorney for such parties. ”
(Emphasis added) This language suggests that a corporation may bring
an action in a Small Claims Court without the aid of an attorney, and
article 2460a has been so construed. Attorney General Opinion C-82
(1963).
However, Rule 7, T. R. C. P., which provides that “[a]ny party to
a suit may appear and prosecute or defend his rights therein, either in
person or by an attorney of the court, ” has been interpreted as applying
only to individuals and not to corporations. Globe Leasing, Inc. v.
Engine Supply and Machine Service, 327 S. W. 2d 43 (Tex. Civ. App.
--Houston 1969, no writ). The court therefore held that a corporation
may appear in court only through an attorney. Globe concerned an action
in a District Court, which courts are expressly governed by the Rules of
Civil Procedure pursuant to Rule 2, which provides in part:
p. 2420
The Honorable Franklin L. Smith page 2 (H-538)
These rules shall govern the procedure in the
justice, county, district, and appellate courts
of the State of Texas in all actions of a civil nature.
. . . .
The procedure in Small Claims Courts is governed by article 2460a,
and the Rules of Civil Procedure are applicable only insofar as provided by
that article. Rule 7 and the Globe court’s construction thereof are there-
fore inapplicable to actions in Small Claims Courts.
We are supported in this determination by the inapplicability of
the reasoning behind the a rule to Small Claims Courts. The Globe
court cited Brandstein v. White Lamps, 20 F. Supp. 369 (S. D. N. Y. 1937)
and Simbraw, Inc. v. United States, 367 F. 2d 373 (3rd Cir. 1966) as
stating the appropriate reasoning.
The confusion that has resulted in this case from
pleadings awkwardly drafted and motions inarticu-
lately presented . . . demonstrates the wisdom of
such a policy.
Simbraw, supra. This reasoning is no more applicable to corporations
than to individuals. Further, it is vitiated by the simplified procedure
in Small Claims Courts. A simplified form of pleading is utilized, [article
2460a, section 4, Attorney General Opinion C-283 (1964)]; the hearing is
informal, [article 2460a, section 7-j; and it is the “duty of the judge to
develop all of the facts in the particular ease, ” including the summoning
and questioning of witnesses and parties. [Article 2460a, b 93.
A second rationale requiring a corporation to appear through a
licensed attorney is presented in Brandstein, supra.
Were it possible for corporations to prosecute or
defend actions in person, through their own officers,
men unfit by character and training, men, whose credo
is that the end justifies the means, disbarred lawyers
p. 2421
The Honorable Franklin L. Smith page 3 (H-538)
or lawyers of other jurisdictions would soon create
opportunities for,themselves as officers of certain
classes of corporations and then freely appear in
our courts as a matter of pure business not subject
to the ethics of our profession or the supervision of
our bar associates and the discipline of our courts.
However, both the jurisdictional limit and the form of the hearing operate
to undermine the application of this reasoning to Small Claims Courts.
As stated in People v. Alfani, 125 N.E. 671, at 674 (N.Y. Comm. App.
1919) :
The results cannot be serious. The cases are
generally of minor importance to the parties;
such occasions are seldom frequent enough to
make it a business, and the procedure is as
informal as to constitute the judge really an
arbitrer in the dispute.
In light of the language of article 2460a and of the inapplicability
to Small Claims Courts of both the rationale underlying the Globe court’s
interpretation of Rule 7 and of the Rules themselves, we believe that a
corporation may appear in Small Claims Courts through a non-lawyer
employee.
SUMMARY
A corporation may appear in a Small Claims
Court through an employee, whether or not he be
a licensed attorney.
Very truly yours,
Attorney General of Texas
p. 2422
The Honorable Franklin L. Smith ‘page 4 (H-538)
APPROVED:
EATH, Chairman
Opinion Committee
lg
p. 2423