Under Washington law, corporate representation in Washington court must be handled by a licensed attorney. This rule applies to corporations, LLCs, and partnerships. Business owners cannot represent their companies in most courts unless they are lawyers.
This article reviews Dutch Village Mall v. Pelletti, a Washington Court of Appeals case that clarified this rule and established strict enforcement against unauthorized representation.
Dutch Village Mall v. Pelletti and Corporate Representation Rules
The central case addressing corporate representation in Washington court is Dutch Village Mall v. Pelletti, 162 Wn. App. 531 (2011). In this case, a business owner attempted to represent a corporation in court without being a licensed attorney. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that:
“An artificial entity must appear through a licensed attorney. Any filings submitted on behalf of a corporation by a non-lawyer are invalid.”
👉 Read the full opinion on Casetext
Why Attorney Representation Is Required in Washington Courts
Whether in District, Municipal, or Superior Court, corporate entities must use licensed attorneys for any of the following:
- Filing lawsuits or appeals
- Responding to legal actions
- Appearing in court
- Entering into court-approved agreements
This rule is based on RCW 2.48.170, which prohibits the unauthorized practice of law.
👉 Read RCW 2.48.170 – Unauthorized Practice of Law
👉 Washington Court Rules – Legal Representation
Consequences of Improper Corporate Representation
If a non-lawyer tries to represent a corporation in court, Washington judges may:
- Strike the pleadings
- Dismiss the case
- Block further participation
- Refer the issue for sanctions or review
This can result in the loss of legal rights by default and serious consequences for the business.
📚 Additional Resources
▶️ Bail Bond Justification Process in Washington Courts
▶️ RCW 2.48.170 – Practice of Law Limited to Active Bar Members
▶️ Washington State Court Rules for Civil Procedure
▶️ Understanding Bond Forfeiture in Washington
Navigating the Complexities of Bail Bond Forfeiture: A Look at State v. All City Bail Bonds
This article discusses the legal complexities surrounding bail bond forfeiture as highlighted in the case of State v. All City Bail Bonds. It examines how the court interpreted the responsibilities of bail bond agents and the conditions under which forfeiture may occur.
Read more
Understanding the Legal Implications of Cash Bail Forfeiture: Insights from State of Washington v. Edward L. Jeglum—Is Cash Bail Different than Bail Bonds?
This article analyzes the case of State of Washington v. Edward L. Jeglum, focusing on the distinctions between cash bail and bail bonds. It outlines the implications of forfeiture in both scenarios and explores how courts view the obligations of defendants and bail agents.
Read more
Regan v. McLachlan: A Legal Analysis
This article provides a detailed legal analysis of the case Regan v. McLachlan, which addresses bail bond forfeiture. It examines the circumstances that led to the forfeiture and the legal precedents that were considered by the court.
Read more
Examining Automatic Exoneration of Bail Bonds: Insights from State v. French
This article explores the concept of automatic exoneration of bail bonds as discussed in State v. French. It highlights the legal framework that allows for the exoneration of bonds under certain conditions, and how this impacts defendants and bail bondsmen.
Read more
Washington Law Allows Bail Bonds to be Filed in Open Court (RCW 10.19.065)
This article discusses the implications of Washington law that permits bail bonds to be filed in open court. It outlines the procedural changes and what this means for transparency and accessibility in the bail bond process.
Read more
Areas of Practice: DUI & Alcohol Offences, Criminal Defense, Personal Injury, Domestic Violence and Traffic Infractions.
We service Roslyn and Tacoma, Washington State and surrounding areas.
Review our client resources here
Contact us anytime for your urgent legal needs.
About Blanford Law:
We are no-nonsense, relentless, fair, and honest. We are great listeners instead of fast talkers, that is just who we are. More than 20 years ago, Ken began practicing law with a deeply-seeded belief that every person has the right to the best legal representation available. He built his law firm on that belief. Another belief that he strongly adheres to is his fundamental belief that clients deserve respect, with no assumptions or preconceived notions. If you or someone you know is accused of a crime or injured as a result of the negligence of another, please have them call us at 253-720-9304 or email us info@blanfordlaw.com
