{ "id": 11713689, "name": "JOHNNIE J. PETERKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. THE COLUMBUS COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee", "name_abbreviation": "Peterkin v. Columbus County Board of Education", "decision_date": "1997-07-15", "docket_number": "No. COA 96-1315", "first_page": "826", "last_page": "828", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "126 N.C. App. 826" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.", "id": 14983, "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 5, "name_long": "North Carolina", "name": "N.C." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "90 ALR3d 158", "category": "reporters:specialty", "reporter": "A.L.R. 3d", "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "51 ALR3d 950", "category": "reporters:specialty", "reporter": "A.L.R. 3d", "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "3 ALR2d 466", "category": "reporters:specialty", "reporter": "A.L.R. 2d", "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983", "category": "laws:leg_statute", "reporter": "U.S.C.", "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "176 S.E.2d 161", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1970, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "163" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "277 N.C. 94", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8561932 ], "year": 1970, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "98" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/277/0094-01" ] }, { "cite": "272 S.E.2d 920", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1980, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "922" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "50 N.C. App. 150", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 2674319 ], "year": 1980, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "152" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/50/0150-01" ] }, { "cite": "813 F. Supp. 1116", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "F. Supp.", "case_ids": [ 3835190 ], "year": 1993, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "1118", "parenthetical": "plaintiff must prove that defendant intentionally discriminated against him based upon an impermissible factor" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/f-supp/813/1116-01" ] }, { "cite": "837 F. Supp. 692", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "F. Supp.", "case_ids": [ 11292479 ], "year": 1993, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "699" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/f-supp/837/0692-01" ] }, { "cite": "896 F.2d 793", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "F.2d", "case_ids": [ 10535753 ], "year": 1990, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "796" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/f2d/896/0793-01" ] }, { "cite": "897 F.Supp. 893", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "F. Supp.", "case_ids": [ 7841972 ], "weight": 2, "year": 1995, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "896", "parenthetical": "citing Weldon v. Kraft, Inc., 896 F.2d 793, 796 (3d Cir. 1990); O'Brien v. City of Philadelphia, 837 F. Supp. 692, 699 (E.D.Pa. 1993); Stair v. Lehigh Valley Carpenters Local Union No. 600, 813 F. Supp. 1116, 1118 (E.D.Pa. 1993" }, { "page": "896", "parenthetical": "citation omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/f-supp/897/0893-01" ] }, { "cite": "42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983", "category": "laws:leg_statute", "reporter": "U.S.C.", "weight": 2, "opinion_index": 0 } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 366, "char_count": 5107, "ocr_confidence": 0.742, "pagerank": { "raw": 7.915390959663416e-08, "percentile": 0.46142419886255914 }, "sha256": "f35b1266c36495fcf42f3770fa56bac8c2e32301b64d7f27d6287d3b83162012", "simhash": "1:1bf97fd84a5daab4", "word_count": 818 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:11:14.463583+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Judges LEWIS and MARTIN, John C. concur." ], "parties": [ "JOHNNIE J. PETERKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. THE COLUMBUS COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "WYNN, Judge.\nThis action stems from plaintiff Johnnie J. Peterkin\u2019s dismissal as a vocational teacher in the Columbus County school system through a Reduction in Force (\u201cRIF\u201d). Rather than administratively appealing the Columbus County Board of Education\u2019s decision to terminate his employment, Mr. Peterkin chose to file the subject action nearly three years later. Following the trial court\u2019s dismissal of his action under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, Mr. Peterkin appealed to this Court.\nThe sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in determining that Mr. Peterkin failed to allege an actionable claim for violation of 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983 based on racial discrimination. We affirm the trial court\u2019s decision.\n42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983 covers all types of discrimination by state officials, insofar as the discrimination is based upon constitutionally impermissible factors such as race, gender, religion, or the exercise of First Amendment rights. In order to make out a claim of racial discrimination, a plaintiff \u201cmust allege purposeful discrimination; that is, he must assert that [defendant] took some adverse action against him as a result of a discriminatory animus.\u201d Sterling v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Authority, 897 F.Supp. 893, 896 (E.D.Pa. 1995) (citing Weldon v. Kraft, Inc., 896 F.2d 793, 796 (3d Cir. 1990); O\u2019Brien v. City of Philadelphia, 837 F. Supp. 692, 699 (E.D.Pa. 1993); Stair v. Lehigh Valley Carpenters Local Union No. 600, 813 F. Supp. 1116, 1118 (E.D.Pa. 1993) (plaintiff must prove that defendant intentionally discriminated against him based upon an impermissible factor)). A plaintiff can prove purposeful discrimination by direct evidence or by showing that \u201c(1) he was a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; and (3) others not in the protected class were treated more favorably.\u201d Sterling, 897 F. Supp. at 896 (citation omitted).\nIn the subject case, the trial court dismissed Mr. Peterkin\u2019s claim under Rule 12(b)(6) because he failed to plead the necessary elements to set forth a claim for racial discrimination under \u00a7 1983. There are three instances where the dismissal of a complaint is appropriate: (1) when the face of a complaint reveals that no law supports plaintiffs claim; (2) when the face of the complaint reveals that some fact essential to plaintiffs claim is missing; or (3) when some fact disclosed in the complaint defeats plaintiffs claim. Advertising Co. v. City of Charlotte, 50 N.C. App. 150, 152, 272 S.E.2d 920, 922 (1980). In ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, all the allegations of the complaint are taken as true, but conclusions of law are not. Sutton v. Duke, 277 N.C. 94, 98, 176 S.E.2d 161, 163 (1970). Furthermore, only matters contained in the pleadings are considered in a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. N.C.R. Civ. P. 12(b).\nIn his complaint, Mr. Peterkin alleged that defendant violated his civil rights \u201cby erroneously assigning points for rank and certification [to another employee] which was done in a scheme to dismiss the plaintiff from employment.\u201d However, nowhere in his complaint does he set forth language that makes out a prima facie claim of racial discrimination under \u00a7 1983. Significantly, the complaint fails to set forth any facts from which it may be inferred that defendant discriminated against Mr. Peterkin on account of race. Having failed to allege facts that would support a \u00a7 1983 claim, we must conclude that the trial court properly granted defendant\u2019s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss this action. Accordingly, the order of the trial court is, Affirmed.\nJudges LEWIS and MARTIN, John C. concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "WYNN, Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Earl Whitted, Jr. for plaintiff-appellant.", "Tharrington Smith, by Randall M. Roden and Daniel W. Clark, for defendant-appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "JOHNNIE J. PETERKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. THE COLUMBUS COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee\nNo. COA 96-1315\n(Filed 15 July 1997)\nConstitutional Law \u00a7 86 (NCI4th)\u2014 teacher dismissal \u2014 racial discrimination \u2014 insufficient complaint\nThe complaint of a former vocational teacher dismissed through a reduction in force failed to state a claim against defendant county board of education for racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983 where he alleged only that defendant violated his civil rights \u201cby erroneously assigning points for rank and certification [to another employee] which was done in a scheme to dismiss plaintiff from employment.\u201d\nAm Jnr 2d, Civil Rights \u00a7\u00a7 3, 4.\nRestrictive covenants, conditions, or agreements in respect of real property discriminating against persons on account of race, color, or religion. 3 ALR2d 466.\nDiscrimination in provision of municipal services or facilities as civil rights violation. 51 ALR3d 950.\nConstruction and application of state equal rights amendments forbidding determination of rights based on sex. 90 ALR3d 158.\nAppeal by plaintiff from order entered 9 August 1996 by Judge D. Jack Hooks, Jr. in Columbus County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 22 May 1997.\nEarl Whitted, Jr. for plaintiff-appellant.\nTharrington Smith, by Randall M. Roden and Daniel W. Clark, for defendant-appellee." }, "file_name": "0826-01", "first_page_order": 864, "last_page_order": 866 }