On July 12, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas dismissed an appeal filed by Toneisha Medina, who was representing Construction Technologies of Texas Inc. (CTI Houston) pro se. The dismissal was based on a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, as Medina, not being a licensed attorney, lacked the standing to appeal a judgment against the corporation. Villages Landscaping and Plant Care LLC had previously sued CTI for breach of contract, resulting in a judgment against CTI for $10,671.23, plus attorney’s fees and court costs.
Medina filed a notice of appeal and an appellate brief on CTI's behalf, but Villages Landscaping moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that only a licensed attorney can represent a corporation in court. The court initially denied the dismissal motions but later reconsidered, leading to the dismissal.
The opinion emphasized that a corporation must act through an attorney in legal proceedings, a principle grounded in Texas law regarding unauthorized practice of law. Medina's actions in filing the notice of appeal were deemed ineffective since she could not legally represent CTI, aligning with precedent that invalidated appeals filed by non-attorney representatives of corporations.
The appellant failed to file an effective notice of appeal, resulting in a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction for the court to hear the case. Citing Premier Associates, the court noted that a pro se representative's notice on behalf of a corporation was ineffective. Only parties to a suit have standing to appeal, as established in Yahvah v. Harris County. Since Medina attempted to appeal on behalf of Construction Technologies and individually, but was not a party in the lower court where judgment was rendered solely against Construction Technologies, the court lacks jurisdiction. Consequently, both motions to dismiss filed by Villages Landscaping are upheld, and the appeal is dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The panel included Justices Kelly, Goodman, and Guerra.
