February 24, 1975 

The Honorable Franklin L. Smith 

Nueces County Attorney 

Nueces County Courthouse 

Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 

Opinion No. H- 538 

Re: May a non-lawyer 

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 nonlawyer 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 therefore 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 inarticulately 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