of another not permitted). “No private contract can authorize the unauthorized practice of the law. In re Battelle Mem’l Inst., 170 N.E.2d 774, 782 (Ohio Com.Pl.1960)(rev’d on other grounds). See also Herndon v. Lee, 281 Ala. 61, 199 So.2d 74, 78 (1967) (affirming injunction granted to candidate for elected office to enjoin placing the name of another candidate on general election ballot because the petition was not presented by an attorney to court); Ramada Inns, Inc. v. Lane & Bird Advertising, Inc., 102 Ariz. 127, 426 P.2d 395, 396-97 (1967) (finding defendant’s answer defective because not signed by an attorney, following the position taken by the vast majority of jurisdictions); Leonard v. Walsh, 73 Ill.App.2d 45, 220 N.E.2d 57, 59 (1966) (citing Robb v. Smith, 4 Ill. 46 (1841) (<HOLDING>)).” Telephone Man, Inc. v. Hinds County, 791
holding that a section 1983 suit against an officer in his or her official capacity is simply another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent holding that exclusive sales agent was a person damaged by the unlawful competition of defendant and therefore was entitled to maintain a civil action for injunctive relief under  1125a holding that the person who travels as an agent of person defrauded is a victim holding that no person can commence or maintain an action in a court of record as agent for another unless he is a regularly licensed attorney holding that licensed agent is in privity with principal for purpose of establishing identity of parties record establishes classic employeremployee relationship in which corporation is vicariously liable for conduct of agent