|
|
|
|
|
|
by vkou
2998 days ago
|
|
|
My naive reading of this leads me to believe that they can send a lawyer who is primarily employed for... A million and one other purposes. (M&A, non-small-claims-court litigation, contract law, etc.) What they can't do is send a lawyer employee whose sole job is small-claims-court litigation. |
|
|
> (m) Nothing in this section shall operate or be construed to authorize an attorney to participate in a small claims action except as expressly provided in Section 116.530.
Here is the relevant part of section 116.530 [1]:
> (a) Except as permitted by this section, no attorney may take part in the conduct or defense of a small claims action.
> (b) Subdivision (a) does not apply if the attorney is appearing to maintain or defend an action in any of the following capacities:
> (1) By or against himself or herself.
> (2) By or against a partnership in which he or she is a general partner and in which all the partners are attorneys.
> (3) By or against a professional corporation of which he or she is an officer or director and of which all other officers and directors are attorneys.
So...it looks like for a corporation that is not a professional corporation, they cannot send an attorney even if that attorney is a regular employee.
That does raise an interesting question. What happens if a corporation is not a professional corporation, but every officer, director, and employee is an attorney? They would not fall under the 116.530(b) exception, and so would seem to all be excluded uner 116.540(m).
[1] http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection...