{
  "id": 8525669,
  "name": "RONALD D. BECTON v. ALICE M. GEORGE",
  "name_abbreviation": "Becton v. George",
  "decision_date": "1988-06-21",
  "docket_number": "No. 873DC1083",
  "first_page": "607",
  "last_page": "609",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "90 N.C. App. 607"
    }
  ],
  "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": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 50-13.4",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 49-14",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "176 S.E. 2d 161",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "277 N.C. 94",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8561932
      ],
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/277/0094-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "264 S.E. 2d 816",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1980,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "46 N.C. App. 182",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8549692
      ],
      "year": 1980,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/46/0182-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "328 S.E. 2d 811",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "74 N.C. App. 413",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8524781
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/74/0413-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 50-13.4",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 49-14",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 221,
    "char_count": 2715,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.838,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.087085966315723e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3793543561806113
    },
    "sha256": "c364e46ae8ed051a648fdfefc8a64e3d169948a10cc63520717990a5ec422d1c",
    "simhash": "1:08ef9b7a7c6f32f4",
    "word_count": 474
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:55:12.261630+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Chief Judge HEDRICK and Judge COZORT concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "RONALD D. BECTON v. ALICE M. GEORGE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "WELLS, Judge.\nIn its order granting defendant\u2019s N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the trial court found and concluded that an action to establish paternity pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 49-14 may not be maintained after a child\u2019s eighteenth birthday. In his sole argument, plaintiff contends this was error. For the reasons stated below, we do not reach this question, but affirm the trial court\u2019s order on other grounds.\nThis Court has held that the legislative purpose underlying G.S. \u00a7 49-14 paternity actions is to provide the basis or means of establishing the identity of the putative father in order to allow the courts to impose an obligation of support. See Smith v. Price, 74 N.C. App. 413, 328 S.E. 2d 811 (1985); Cogdell v. Johnson, 46 N.C. App. 182, 264 S.E. 2d 816 (1980).\nUnder the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 50-13.4, only a parent who has custody of a minor child may bring an action for its support. Although plaintiff has alleged that he is the father of Shelly Denise, he has not alleged that he has custody.\nWhere a complaint pleads facts that will necessarily defeat the claim or request relief not authorized by law, the claim must be dismissed. See Sutton v. Duke, 277 N.C. 94, 176 S.E. 2d 161 (1970).\nAs plaintiff has failed to state a claim on which he is entitled to any relief, the order of the trial court must be and is\nAffirmed.\nChief Judge HEDRICK and Judge COZORT concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WELLS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "John H. Harmon for plaintiff-appellant.",
      "Beamon, Kellum & Hollows, P.A., by Norman B. Kellum, Jr. and Robert P. Holmes, IV, for defendant-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "RONALD D. BECTON v. ALICE M. GEORGE\nNo. 873DC1083\n(Filed 21 June 1988)\nParent and Child \u00a7 7\u2014 action for child support \u2014 properly dismissed\nThe trial court properly dismissed an action under N.C.G.S. \u00a7 50-13.4 for child support where plaintiff alleged that he is the father of the child but did not allege that he has custody. N.C.G.S. \u00a7 49-14, N.C.G.S. \u00a7 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(6).\nPlaintiff appeals from Ragan, James E., Ill, Judge. Order entered 19 June 1987 in Craven County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 2 May 1988.\nPlaintiff filed his complaint on 15 May 1987 alleging a cause of action under N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 49-14 (1985) claiming inter alia that on 18 May 1969 defendant had given birth to Shelly Denise George; that plaintiff was the child\u2019s biological father; and that said child was entitled to support from defendant under N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 50-13.4. Defendant was served with the summons and complaint on 18 May 1987.\nOn defendant\u2019s motion, the district court dismissed plaintiffs action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure. From the trial court\u2019s order of dismissal, plaintiff appeals.\nJohn H. Harmon for plaintiff-appellant.\nBeamon, Kellum & Hollows, P.A., by Norman B. Kellum, Jr. and Robert P. Holmes, IV, for defendant-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0607-01",
  "first_page_order": 637,
  "last_page_order": 639
}
