Opinion ID: 2361634
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: DES must be represented by counsel before its appeals tribunal

Text: This Court promulgated Rule 5.29 to address the unauthorized practice of law, but carved out an exception for representation in employment security proceedings. Rule 5.29(c) provides: In any employment security proceeding before the state division of employment security, a corporation, partnership or other business entity authorized by law may be represented by an officer of the entity or a person in the full time employment of the entity in a managerial capacity who shall be afforded the opportunity to participate in the proceeding. Rule 5.29(c). [4] At issue in Haggard's case is whether DES is included under Rule 5.29(c)'s exception permitting non-lawyer representation in employment security proceedings. DES contends that it may be considered a business entity under Rule 5.29(c), such that it need not be represented by legal counsel in its employment security cases. It asserts that it has been effectively represented by non-lawyer managerial employees for many years. The express language of Rule 5.29(c) provides an exception for only a corporation, partnership or other business entity authorized by law. DES is not a business entity authorized by lawit is a state agency. As such, DES is not entitled to be represented by a non-lawyer employee pursuant to Rule 5.29(c) at any of its proceedings. [5]