Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Doster, Mickes, James, Ullom, Benson & Guest, LLC, Respondent, v. Antibody Research Corporation, Appellant.
Case Number: ED90987
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: 2009-04-14
Outcome: dismissed
Practice Area: administrative
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/doster-mickes-james-ullom-benson-guest-llc-respondent-v-antibody-research-d90987
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=30947
Related Practice Areas:
- Corporate Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/corporate?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=corporate&ott_archive_query=Doster%2C+Mickes%2C+James%2C+Ullom%2C+Benson+%26+Guest%2C+LLC%2C+Respondent%2C+v.+Antibody+Research+Corporation%2C+Appellant.&ott_archive_link_source=text&ott_archive_link_score=6&ott_archive_link_evidence=text%3A+llc%3B+text%3A+corporation&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: corporate; source: text; score: 6; evidence: text: llc, text: corporation)

---
## Syllabus

DOSTER, MICKES, JAMES, ULLOM, ) No. ED90987 
BENSON & GUEST, LLC, )  
                                                                             )                                                                             
            Respondent,            )            Appeal            from the Circuit Court of 
  ) St. Louis County 
v.  ) Cause No. 07AC-26928 
                        )            Honorable            Brenda            Stith-Loftin            
ANTIBODY RESEARCH CORPORATION,    ) 
                                                                             )                                                                             
Appellant.  ) Filed:  April 14, 2009

---

## PER CURIAM.

Before:  Kathianne Knaup Crane, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Kenneth M. Romines, J. 
 
ORDER
 
 Appellant Antibody Research Corporation (ARC) appeals the judgment of the Circuit 
Court of St. Louis County, the Honorable Brenda Stith-Loftin presiding, in favor of Respondent 
Doster Mickes, in a dispute over attorney's fees.  However, because we find ARC's brief in gross 
violation of Rule 84.04, we grant Doster Mickes' motion to dismiss the appeal. 
 ARC's brief contains no citations to statutes, case law, or any other authority.  It contains 
no citations to the record, nor does it recite any standard of review.  It consists merely of various 
disputations concerning the court's judgment and recitations of the facts as ARC views them.  As 
such, the brief preserves nothing for appeal.  Kramer v. Park-Et Restaurant, Inc., 226 S.W.3d 
867, 870 (Mo. App. E.D. 2007). 

 
2
 
 Furthermore, ARC claims to be represented pro se.  However, a corporation is not a 
natural person and thus cannot represent itself pro se.  Prop. Exch. & Sales, Inc. (PESI) by 
Jacobs  v. Bozarth, 778 S.W.2d 1, 2-3 (Mo. App. E.D. 1989).  Rather, ARC must be represented 
by an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of Missouri.  Id.  See also § 484.020 RSMo. 
(2000).  
DISMISSED.