midpage
Projects
Sign in to see your projects.
2018 Ohio 3193
Ohio Ct. App.
2018
Read the full case

Background

  • Cannabis for Cures, LLC (CFC) filed suit against the Ohio State Board of Pharmacy challenging aspects of H.B. 523 and seeking removal of the Board’s role in the medical-marijuana program. The complaint was signed and filed by Renea Murnahan‑Turner, CFC’s CEO, who is not a licensed attorney.
  • The Board moved to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(1) and (6), arguing the complaint was a legal nullity because an LLC must be represented by licensed counsel, and also raising standing and forum concerns (Court of Claims for money claims).
  • CFC sought to amend the complaint to add Murnahan‑Turner as an individual plaintiff and requested other relief; the Board opposed and urged dismissal without prejudice so the LLC could refile with counsel.
  • The trial court dismissed the complaint on December 18, 2017, because a non‑attorney (Murnahan‑Turner) cannot file or conduct litigation on behalf of an LLC.
  • Murnahan‑Turner filed a pro se notice of appeal in her own name. The appellate court concluded the appeal must be dismissed because (a) the LLC’s original filing was a nullity under R.C. 4705.01 and (b) Murnahan‑Turner lacked standing to appeal.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether an LLC may be represented in court by its non‑lawyer CEO Murnahan‑Turner proceeded for CFC; argued sufficiency of complaint Board: R.C. 4705.01 bars non‑attorneys from representing an entity; filings are nullities Only licensed attorneys may represent LLCs; non‑attorney filings are legal nullities; dismissal appropriate
Whether the complaint could be amended to add Murnahan‑Turner individually or otherwise cured Sought leave to amend to add Murnahan‑Turner as plaintiff Board: amendment inappropriate because original filing was a nullity; jurisdictional/venue issues exist Amendment not available to cure the nullity; Murnahan‑Turner had no standing to request amendment on behalf of the LLC
Whether the appeal could proceed when filed pro se by non‑attorney CEO Murnahan‑Turner appealed in her own name claiming plaintiff status Board: appeal improper because either (a) she lacked authority to represent CFC, or (b) the LLC’s filing never commenced an action so she has no appealable interest Appeal dismissed: if she appealed for CFC, she lacked authority; if she appealed personally, she lacked standing because the LLC filing was a nullity
Whether the trial court should reach merits of statutory/constitutional challenges to H.B. 523 Complaint raised policy and discrimination claims against Board Board: no constitutional claim shown; Board acted within authority; procedural defects require dismissal first Court did not reach merits; procedural defects (representation/standing) dispositive

Key Cases Cited

  • Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens, 106 Ohio St.3d 144 (2005) (only licensed attorneys may file and manage court actions on another’s behalf)
  • Disciplinary Counsel v. Kafele, 108 Ohio St.3d 283 (2006) (an LLC is a separate legal entity and may be represented in court only by a licensed attorney)
  • Union Savings Assn. v. Home Owners Aid, 23 Ohio St.2d 60 (1970) (corporations cannot appear in court through officers who are not licensed counsel)
  • Sheridan Mobile Village, Inc. v. Larsen, 78 Ohio App.3d 203 (1992) (non‑attorney corporate filings should be dismissed; corporate entities need counsel)
  • Williams v. Global Constr. Co. Ltd., 26 Ohio App.3d 119 (1986) (when a non‑attorney files suit for a corporation, the complaint is properly dismissed without prejudice)
  • Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13 (2012) (standing is determined at commencement of suit)
  • Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta, 141 Ohio St.3d 75 (2014) (lack of standing defeats a court’s jurisdiction)
  • Ohio Pyro, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Commerce, 115 Ohio St.3d 375 (2007) (standing requires a personal stake in the outcome)
  • In re Guardianship of Santrucek, 120 Ohio St.3d 67 (2008) (appeals may be brought only by parties with a prejudiced present interest)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Cannabis for Cures, L.L.C. v. State of Ohio Bd. of Pharm.
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Aug 10, 2018
Citations: 2018 Ohio 3193; 2018-CA-12
Docket Number: 2018-CA-12
Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App.
Log In