Ihop 1914 v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 102 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. E-22-22

Opinion Delivered February 22, 2023 IHOP #1914 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS V. BOARD OF REVIEW [NO. 2021-BR-03917] DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES APPELLEE DISMISSED

MIKE MURPHY, Judge

Appellant IHOP #1914 (IHOP) appeals from the Arkansas Board of Review’s December 13, 2021 decision finding that the claimant, Tanaly Godwin, was entitled to benefits because she was discharged from last work for reasons other than misconduct. We dismiss due to a lack of jurisdiction.

IHOP filed its petition for appeal with this court on January 10, 2022. The notice of appeal was signed by Angela Delt. Delt is not an attorney licensed to practice in Arkansas. It is well-settled law that corporations must be represented by licensed attorneys. Bank of Fayetteville NA v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 96. 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 to the jurisdiction of a court, those actions, such as the filing of pleadings, are rendered a nullity. Id.

Here, Delt indicated on the petition for review that IHOP was not represented by an attorney, and she signed the petition. Because Delt is not an attorney, she may not represent IHOP in this case. Id. 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 Delt was practicing law when she signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal. See Super 8 Motel v. Dir., 2019 Ark. App. 555.

Dismissed.

VIRDEN and HIXSON, JJ., agree.

Tanaly Goodwin, pro se appellant.

Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, Associate General Counsel, for appellee.