who has the right to seek such relief from the courts. Our sister court has held that an individual attorney may not sue to have another attorney disbarred. That power rests solely with the state bar. State ex rel. Chandler v. Dancer, 391 S.W.2d 504, 505 (Tex.Civ.App.-Corpus Christi 1965, writ, ref'd n.r.e.). Since Chandler was decided, other courts of appeals have recognized the state bar’s authority in this area. See McGregor v. Clawson, 506 S.W.2d 922, 928 (Tex.Civ.App.-Waco 1974, no writ) (by adopting State Bar Act, the legislature intended “to provide for a full and comprehensive set of laws to cover completely the practice of law, and regulation of and disciplining of lawyers”); see also Bradt v. State Bar of Tex., 905 S.W.2d 756, 759 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no writ) (<HOLDING>); Galindo v. State, 535 S.W.2d 923, 925
holding that private utpcpl claim included individual questions of fact and could not be certified holding that one who deals with a business entity under an assumed name may bring an action against it under the assumed name holding that private individual could not bring a claim to remove a judges name from the roll of attorneys holding party should have segregated attorneys fees for fraud claim from attorneys fees for contract claim based largely on the difference between the essential elements of each claim holding that the mspa only permits a private party to bring suit where the private party has itself suffered an injury