This United States Supreme Court and Michigan Supreme Court are clear in unauthorized practice of law and void judgment and Order. The US Supreme Court emphatically articulated in, Rowland v. Calif. Men's Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-203 (1993). It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel. Osborn v. President of Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 829, 6 L.Ed. 204 (1824); see Turner v. American Bar Assn., 407 F.Supp. 451, 476 (ND Tex. 1975) (citing the "long line of cases" from 1824 to the present holding that a corporation may only be represented by licensed counsel), affirmance order sub nom. Taylor v. Montgomery, 539 F.2d 715 (Table) (CA7 1976), and affd sub nom. Pilla v. American Bar Assn., 542 F.2d 56 (CA8 1976).

Michigan law prohibits the unauthorized practice of law by individuals MCL 600.916 and MCL 450.681.

Whether the foreclosure judgment obtained by fraud and unauthorized practice of law is void