eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2010-03

yahvah-thru-his-yahweh-kingdom-people-ekklesia-via-ykp-kingdom ( 2010 )


Menu:

  • Opinion issued March 11, 2010











      In The

    Court of Appeals

    For The

    First District of Texas




    NO. 01-08-00292-CV




    YAHVAH THRU HIS “YAHWEH KINGDOM PEOPLE” EKKLESIA VIA “Y.K.P.” KINGDOM CORPORATION SOLE AMBASSADOR CLAUDE HUGH LLOYD THE SECOND OF YAHVAH YAHVAHSHUA YAHVAHRUACH AND AMBASSADOR CASSONDRA JEAN LLOYD OF YAHVAH YAHVAHSHUA YAHVAHRUACH, Appellant


    V.


    HARRIS COUNTY, HARRIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DISTRICT, PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, HARRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, CITY OF BAYTOWN, GOOSE CREEK CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND LEE COLLEGE DISTRICT, Appellees




    On Appeal from the 165th District Court

    Harris County, Texas

    Trial Court Cause No. 2006-46711




    MEMORANDUM OPINION


              Appellant, Yahvah thru His “Yahweh Kingdom People” ekklesia via “Y.K.P.” kingdom corporation sole Ambassador Claude Hugh Lloyd the Second of Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach and Ambassador Cassondra Jean Lloyd of Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach, seeks to appeal the trial court’s award of summary judgment in favor of Harris County and the other appellee taxing authorities in this suit for recovery of delinquent taxes against Yahweh Kingdom People, a Texas non-profit corporation. Appellant argues in nine issues that the final summary judgment of the trial court should be set aside.

              We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

    Background

              Yahweh Kingdom People, a non-profit corporation, owns property in a subdivision in Harris County, Texas, with the legal description of Lot 47 of Whispering Pines, Section One. On July 31, 2006, Harris County, on behalf of itself and other county-wide taxing authorities the Harris County Education Department, the Port of Houston Authority of Harris County, the Harris County Flood Control District, and the Harris County Hospital District (collectively “Harris County”) filed suit against Yahweh Kingdom People seeking to recover $24,484.09 in delinquent taxes on the property. The petition recited that Yahweh Kingdom People was “a Texas Non-Profit Corporation, upon whom service may be obtained by serving its Registered Agent, Claude Hugh Lloyd, Jr.” Harris County also joined the City of Baytown, Goose Creek Consolidated Independent School District, and Lee College District as parties that “may have a claim and lien for delinquent taxes against all or part of the same property.”

              Harris County attempted to serve notice on Yahweh Kingdom People by serving Lloyd, but the service was returned with the deputy’s notes stating that he attempted service on six separate occasions and that, at each attempt, Lloyd was home but would not answer the door. Harris County amended its pleadings to include service through the Texas Secretary of State, and that service was returned unclaimed. On May 31, 2007, Claude Lloyd, the registered agent of Yahweh Kingdom People, and his wife Cassondra Lloyd filed a “General Denial and Demand to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction,” purportedly on behalf of “Yahweh.” The trial court subsequently set aside a previous summary judgment and set the cause for a new hearing.

              Harris County, on behalf of itself and the other taxing authorities, filed an amended motion for summary judgment on December 18, 2007. After holding another hearing at which all parties appeared, the trial court signed its Amended Final Summary Judgment granting Harris County’s motion for summary judgment on January 14, 2008. The final summary judgment stated,

    The defendant(s) are as follows:

              Yahweh Kingdom People aka Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach thru his “Yahweh Kingdom People” Ekklesia (religious assembly) via Yahvah’s “Y.K.P.” kingdom corporation sole, Ambassador Claude Hugh Lloyd the Second of YahvahShua YahvahRuach and Ambassador Cassondra Jean Lloyd of Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach, who has answered and has been duly notified of trial and who has appeared in court.

     

              On February 18, 2008, the Lloyds filed a motion for new trial, again purportedly on behalf of “Yahvah.” On April 14, 2008, the Lloyds signed a notice of appeal that stated, “Yahvah thru [sic] His ‘Yahweh Kingdom People’ ekklesia via ‘Y.K.P.’ kingdom corporation sole Ambassador Claude Hugh Lloyd the Second of Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach and Ambassador Cassondra Jean Lloyd of Yahvah YahvahShua YahvahRuach hereby gives Notice of Appeal of Yahvah’s Demand in Comity for New Trial and to Set Aside/Vacate the Courts ‘Amended Fraudulent Summary Judgment’ signed January 14, 2008.”

     

    Analysis

              Only parties to an action have standing to appeal. Cont’l Cas. Co v. Huizar, 740 S.W.2d 429, 430 (Tex. 1987). Standing is implicit in the concept of subject matter jurisdiction, and subject matter jurisdiction is essential to the authority of a court to decide a case. Tex. Ass’n of Bus. v. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440, 443 (Tex. 1993). Because the notice of appeal was taken in the name of “Yahvah,” we lack subject matter jurisdiction because Yahvah was not a party to the judgment in the trial court. We further note that the corporation that was a party to the judgment of the trial court, Yahweh Kingdom People, did not file a timely, valid notice of appeal. The Lloyds, who are not licensed attorneys, signed the notice of appeal on Yahvah’s behalf as his ambassadors, but they are not authorized to represent Yahvah, Yahweh Kingdom People, or any other entity or person besides themselves in legal proceedings. See Dell Dev. Corp. v. Best Indus. Uniform Supply Co., 743 S.W.2d 302, 303 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ denied) (“Corporations may appear and be represented only by a licensed attorney.”); see also Crain v. Unauthorized Practice of Law Comm., 11 S.W.3d 328, 332–34 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied) (explaining that person who is not licensed attorney may not represent other persons in legal matters); Globe Leasing, Inc. v. Engine Supply & Mach. Serv., 437 S.W.2d 43, 45 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1969, no writ) (holding that even if corporation’s president had given timely notice of appeal from judgment against corporation, such notice would be ineffective when president representing corporation was not licensed attorney and stating that “corporation may not appear in court through its officers who are not attorneys”). The deadline for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional and has passed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b), 26.1; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997).  

              Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.  

    Conclusion

              We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

     

     




                                                                 Evelyn V. Keyes

                                                                 Justice

     

    Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Massengale.