SUZANNE RICHTER, APPELLANT,
v.
HIGDON HOMES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A Florida appellate court held that a corporation cannot be represented at trial by a non-lawyer, even if that person is the corporation's sole shareholder and president. The court reversed a jury verdict in favor of Higdon Homes and remanded for a new trial with proper legal representation or for entry of a default judgment.
A corporation may not represent itself through non-lawyer employees, officers, or shareholders, regardless of whether the non-lawyer is the sole shareholder. The trial court erred in permitting Charles Higdon to represent Higdon Homes at trial.
[1] A corporation may not represent itself through non-lawyer employees, officers, or shareholders.
[2] A corporation's sole shareholder cannot represent the corporation in court.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A corporation may not represent itself through non-lawyer employees, officers, or shareholders.”
Statement of the governing legal rule that corporations cannot appear pro se through non-lawyers.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSuzanne Richter sued Higdon Homes, Inc., a Florida corporation, arising from a 1983 preconstruction contract to purchase a residential condominium uni…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
SHIVERS, Judge.
Appellant filed a complaint against appel-lee Higdon Homes, Inc. (Higdon Homes), a Florida corporation, arising out of her 1983 contract to purchase, preconstruction, a residential condominium unit from Higdon Homes. A timely answer to the complaint was prepared and filed by appellee’s counsel. Some time prior to trial, appellee’s counsel withdrew and the case proceeded to jury trial with appellee represented by its sole stockholder and president, Charles Higdon (a non-lawyer). Prior to the beginning of trial, appellant’s attorney objected to Mr. Higdon’s representation of the corporation. The trial court allowed Mr. Hig-don to continue after determining that he was the sole stockholder of the corporation.
A corporation may not represent itself through non-lawyer employees, officers, or shareholders. Nicholson Supply Co. v.
First Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Hardee County, 184 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); See also Szteinbaum v. Kaes Inversiones y Valores, 476 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Punta Gorda Pines Dev., Inc. v. Slack Excavating, Inc., 468 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Hub Financial Corp. v. Olmetti, 465 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Daytona Migi Corp. v. Daytona Automotive Fiberglass, Inc., 417 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Angelini v. Mobile Home Village, Inc., 310 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). This rule applies even where the non-lawyer purporting to represent the corporation is the sole shareholder of the corporation. Southeastern Associates, Inc. v.
First Georgia Bank, 362 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Therefore, the trial court’s allowing Mr. Higdon to represent appellee at trial on the basis that Mr. Higdon was the sole stockholder of the corporation was error. Since appellee’s answer in this case was properly filed by an attorney, default is not required. We vacate the trial court’s final judgment on the verdict in favor of Higdon Homes and we set aside the verdict and remand for new trial if appellee elects to be represented by an attorney. If it does not so elect, we direct the trial court to enter default against appellee and proceed thereafter accordingly. Because we reverse on the first issue presented on appeal, we do not reach appellant’s remaining point.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M. Lawrence Kaplan, M.D. v. Leann R. Morse and Kenneth D. Morse, 870 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…h DCA 2001). Analysis At the outset of our analysis, we note that MEHC was defaulted as a consequence of not obtaining proper representation. See, e.g., Lakeview Auto Sales v. Lott, 753 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Richter v. Higdon Homes, Inc., 544 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). In both Lake-view Auto Sales and Richter, defaults were entered against corporate defendants for failure to obtain counsel. A default generally terminates a party’s right to further defend, except to contest unliquidated damages…
-
Concetta Rafanello v. Bode, 21 So. 3d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…table distribution but must also consider the factors listed above. The trial court also erred in refusing to enter a default judgment against the corporate defendants as they were not represented by counsel at trial. Richter v. Higdon Homes, Inc., 544 So. 2d 300, 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (“[a] corporation may not represent itself through non-lawyer employees, officers, or shareholders”). Therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Reversed and remanded. WARNER, J.…
-
Molina v. Watkins, 824 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…So. 2d 247, 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) ("[i]t is well recognized that a corporation, unlike a natural person, cannot represent itself and cannot appear in a court of law without an attorney.” (citations omitted)); see also Richter v. Higdon Homes, Inc., 544 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (non-lawyer sole shareholder of a corporation may not represent the corporation). . The trial court never made any written rulings at to counts 9, 10, 11, and 12 in Watkins’ counterclaim against FCA. . The parties do not explai…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Nicholson Supply Co., Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Hardee Cnty., 184 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Szteinbaum v. Kaes Inversiones y Valores, 476 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Daytona Migi Corp. v. Daytona Auto. Fiberglass Inc., 417 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Chapman v. Jorge Garcia, M.D., 465 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Punta Gorda Pines Dev., Inc. v. Slack Excavating, Inc., 468 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Se. Assocs., Inc. v. First Ga. Bank, 362 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Remo Joseph Angelini v. Mobile Home Vill., Inc., 310 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)