The Court is asked to permit .withdrawal óf R. Wéltón Whann,' Ésq., John C. Allen, Esq., and.Robert M. McManigal, Esq. as attorneys .for Craft Furniture Mfg. Co., a corporation. They are the only attorneys of record for said defendant. The case is at issue, . .

Said defendant consents to the withdrawal by a document bearing its seal .filed with the Court. .The..Court does not consent: to the withdrawal of attorneys. Approval would leave a corporate defendant without representation. _ Even if a defendant assumes to represent himself, he must either enter his first appearance in the case m propria persona or, be substituted for whoever appeared as his attorney. Defendant .appropriately does not. offer to do this .because, being a corporation, it is without capacity to either represent others or itself.

For' authorities discussing the principles involved, see cases cited to support the following quotation from Cal.Jur. Ten Year.Supplement, 1949, Revision, Vol. *398 9, Sec. 15, p. 448, where the applicable rules are stated as follows:

“Since a corporation cannot practice law, and can only act through the ■agency of natural persons, it follows that it can appear in court on its own ■behalf only through a licensed attorney. It cannot appear by an officer of the corporation who is not an attorney, and may not even file a complaint except by an attorney, whose authority to appear is presumed; in other words, a corporation cannot appear in propria persona. A judgment rendered in such a proceeding is void.”

In any event a withdrawal of attorneys is not the proper course. A substitution of attorneys approved by the Court is the method of changing representation. The purported withdrawal of attorneys is disallowed.