From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re K. M. A., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Unit B
Jul 16, 1981
652 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1981)

Summary

holding that bankruptcy appeal could not be brought by non-attorney on behalf of corporation

Summary of this case from In re Amrco, Inc.

Opinion

No. 81-5421.

July 16, 1981.

Kenneth T. Cooper, pro se.

William F. Beemer, Orlando, Fla., for General Motors Acceptance Corp.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

Before RONEY, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr., and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.


General Motors Acceptance Corporation moves to dismiss K.M.A., Inc.'s appeal because the notice of appeal for the corporate appellant, K.M.A., Inc., was not signed by an attorney.

In January 1980 when the trustee was about to pay General Motors Acceptance Corporation's claim arising from the Chapter X reorganization of K.M.A., Inc., K.M.A., by and through an attorney, filed an objection to the claim. After a trial, the bankruptcy court denied the objection. On appeal to the district court where K.M.A., Inc. was represented by counsel, relief to K.M.A., Inc. was denied. On April 20, 1981, the sole stockholder of K.M.A., Inc., a non-attorney, filed a notice of appeal for the corporation from the district court's adverse holding. He seeks to proceed pro se on behalf of the corporation.

The law is clear that a corporation as a fictional legal person can only be represented by licensed counsel. Commercial Railroad Bank of Vicksburg v. Slocomb, 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 60, 10 L.Ed. 354 (1840); In re Victor Publishers, Inc., 545 F.2d 285 (1st Cir. 1976). This is so even when the person seeking to represent the corporation is its president and major stockholder. In re Las Colinas Development Corp., 585 F.2d 7 (1st Cir. 1978).

It is not clear, however, whether the filing of the corporation's notice of appeal by someone who is not an attorney is sufficient to deprive this Court of its jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Compare Strong Delivery Ministry Association v. Board of Appeals of Cook County, 543 F.2d 32 (7th Cir. 1976), and In re Highley, 459 F.2d 554 (9th Cir. 1972), with DeVilliers v. Atlas Corp., 360 F.2d 292 (10th Cir. 1966). We are mindful of the emphasis placed on flexibility and substance rather than form in the appellate rules, see Fed.R.App.P. 3(c), 26(b). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that General Motors Acceptance Corporation's motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED, unless within 30 days of the entry of this order an attorney admitted to practice before this Court files an appearance to represent the corporate appellant, in which event the appeal shall not be dismissed.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

In re K. M. A., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Unit B
Jul 16, 1981
652 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1981)

holding that bankruptcy appeal could not be brought by non-attorney on behalf of corporation

Summary of this case from In re Amrco, Inc.

holding that bankruptcy appeal could not be brought by non-attorney on behalf of corporation

Summary of this case from In re Amrco, Inc.

ruling that a corporation appearing pro se had 30 days to obtain an attorney before a dismissal would be granted

Summary of this case from Mower v. Ideal Health Inc.

granting a corporation additional time to obtain counsel before dismissing an appeal completely

Summary of this case from Safari Programs, Inc. v. Collecta Int'l Ltd.

granting appellant corporation that filed a notice of appeal via a non-attorney 30 days in which to have an attorney file an appearance on its behalf, absent which appeal would be dismissed

Summary of this case from Mikeska v. Collins

granting a motion to dismiss appeal unless corporation appeared by counsel within 30 days

Summary of this case from Boydston v. Strole Development Company

stating the intention to grant an opposing party's dispositive motion if a licensed attorney did not appear on behalf of the corporate party within thirty days

Summary of this case from Equalnet Inc. v. Bellas

ordering appeal dismissed “unless” attorney appeared on its behalf within thirty days

Summary of this case from In re Amrco, Inc.

ordering appeal dismissed "unless" attorney appeared on its behalf within thirty days

Summary of this case from In re Amrco, Inc.

ordering a conditional dismissal of a corporation's notice of appeal filed by someone who is not an attorney unless the corporation obtains counsel within thirty days

Summary of this case from Riverton Citizens Grp. v. Bingham Cnty. Comm'rs

giving appellant thirty days to retain counsel, when appellant was represented by counsel at the lower court, and attempted to file its appeal pro se

Summary of this case from Gateway One Lending & Fin. LLC v. Millennium Auto Sales LLC
Case details for

In re K. M. A., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:IN RE K. M. A., INC., BANKRUPT. K. M. A., INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Unit B

Date published: Jul 16, 1981

Citations

652 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1981)

Citing Cases

Marcus Techs. v. Baton Rouge Shrimp Co.

Roshan Associates Inc. v. Motiva Enterprises, L.L.C., 241 F.Supp.2d 639, 641, n. 1 (E.D. La. Aug. 28, 2002),…

In re $365,600.00 From Investar Bank Account No. 4004089462

Roshan Associates Inc. v. Motiva Enterprises, L.L.C., 241 F.Supp.2d 639, 641, n. 1 (E.D. La. Aug. 28, 2002),…