Legal Opinion · Dissent

Handy Andy, Inc. v. Ruiz

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District

Decided May 18, 1995No. 13-93-476-CVPublished

1Dissent

FEDERICO G. HINOJOSA, Jr., Justice,

dissenting.

The majority holds that a notary public may file an answer on behalf of a corporation. I disagree and respectfully dissent.

Tex.R.Civ.P. 7 states that “any party to a suit may appear and prosecute or defend his rights therein, either in person or by an attorney of the court.” However, it has long been held that Rule 7 applies only to individuals and not corporations. Globe Leasing, Inc. v. Engine Supply & Machine Serv., 437 S.W.2d 43, 45 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1969, no writ). Only licensed attorneys may practice law. Id A corporation…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dell Development Corp. v. Best Industrial Uniform Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1987
  2. Moore Ex Rel. Moore v. Elektro-Mobil Technik GmbH, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1994
  3. Globe Leasing, Inc. v. Engine Supply & MacHine ServiceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1969
  4. Electronic Data Systems Corp. v. Tyson, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1993
  5. Daylin, Inc. v. Juarez, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1989

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API