Quinn v. Housing Authority of the City of Orlando, 385 So. 2d 1167 (1980)

Facts

  • The Housing Authority of the City of Orlando (the housing authority) filed an eviction action against tenant Loretta Quinn for nonpayment of rent.
  • The eviction complaint was signed and filed on the housing authority’s behalf by its executive director.
  • The executive director was not a licensed attorney.
  • Quinn moved to dismiss, arguing that the housing authority was a corporate entity and therefore could not appear in court through a nonlawyer representative.
  • The trial court denied Quinn’s motion to dismiss, allowing the eviction case to proceed.
  • Quinn appealed the denial of her motion to dismiss.

Issues

  1. Whether a municipal housing authority, as a corporate entity, may file and prosecute an eviction action through a nonlawyer executive director rather than through licensed counsel.
  2. If not, whether the proper remedy is dismissal of the eviction complaint without prejudice to refiling by an attorney.

Decision

  • The appellate court reversed the trial court’s order denying Quinn’s motion to dismiss.
  • The court held that the housing authority, as a corporate entity, could not litigate through a nonlawyer director and that the director’s signing and filing of the complaint constituted unauthorized practice of law.
  • The court remanded with directions to dismiss the eviction complaint without prejudice so the housing authority could refile through licensed counsel.
  • A corporation or other corporate entity must appear in court through a licensed attorney and may not be represented by a nonlawyer officer, employee, or agent.
  • Preparing, signing, and filing pleadings on behalf of a corporate entity, and prosecuting the case in court, are acts that constitute the practice of law.
  • Public or governmental corporate bodies are subject to the same requirement of attorney representation in court as private corporations.
  • When a corporate plaintiff initiates litigation through a nonlawyer representative, dismissal without prejudice is an appropriate remedy to permit refiling through counsel.

Conclusion

Quinn holds that a municipal housing authority, treated as a corporate entity for litigation purposes, cannot pursue an eviction action through a nonlawyer executive director; because the complaint was filed by a lay representative, the trial court should have dismissed the action without prejudice so it could be refiled by licensed counsel.