Cite as 2018 Ark. App. 115 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION IV No. E-17-404
MID-DELTA COMMUNITY SERVICES, INC. APPELLANT
V.
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES, AND THOMAS FRANKS APPELLEES
Opinion Delivered: February 14, 2018 APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS BOARD OF REVIEW
[NO. 2017-BR-01252]
DISMISSED
BART F. VIRDEN, Judge Appellant Mid-Delta Community Services, Inc. (Mid-Delta), a corporation, appeals from the Arkansas Board of Review’s October 6, 2017 decision reversing the Appeal Tribunal and finding that the claimant, Thomas Franks, was entitled to benefits because he was discharged from last work for reasons other than misconduct connected with the work. We dismiss due to a lack of jurisdiction. Mid-Delta filed its petition for appeal with this court on October 18, 2017. Jimmy Sanders, a transit director for Mid-Delta, indicated on the petition for review that Mid-Delta was not represented by an attorney, and he signed the petition. It is well-settled law that corporations must be represented by licensed attorneys. Harvest Rice, Inc. v. Dir., Dep’t of Workforce Servs., 2017 Ark. App. 549. Furthermore, our supreme court has held that when a party not licensed to practice law in this state attempts to represent the interests of others by submitting himself or herself to the jurisdiction of a
court, those actions, such as the filing of pleadings, are rendered a nullity. Smithco Invs. of W. Memphis, Inc. v. Morgan Keegan & Co., 370 Ark. 477, 478, 261 S.W.3d 454, 455 (2007). Here, Sanders is not an attorney and may not represent Mid-Delta in this case. Our case law makes it clear that invoking the process of a court of law constitutes the practice of law. Steel v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 377. Because Sanders was practicing law when he signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal. Dismissed. KLAPPENBACH and MURPHY, JJ., agree. No briefs filed.
2