Barringer v. Barringer

Decision Date04 December 1974
Docket NumberNo. 7419DC817,7419DC817
Citation24 N.C.App. 142,210 S.E.2d 90
PartiesCarol BARRINGER, Petitioner, v. Reece Daughton BARRINGER. Jr., Respondent.
CourtNorth Carolina Court of Appeals

Atty. Gen., James H. Carson, Jr., by Asst. Atty. Gen., William Woodward Webb, Raleigh, for the State.

Davis, Koontz & Horton by Clarence E. Horton, Jr., Concord, for respondent-appellant.

VAUGHN, Judge.

This is a proceeding under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act. The proceeding was initiated in California when petitioner filed the complaint on behalf of three minor children of the parties. In a proceeding filed under this Act the verified complaint is admissible as prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. G.S. § 52A--19.

The complaint in this proceeding is sufficient to establish the needs of the children but is silent as to the ability of either of the parties to provide support. The only evidence offered at trial was from respondent who testified that he had been forced to resign from the job he held in California and had been unable to obtain employment since that time. He testified that he had been promised a job unloading freight in Charlotte. The record is silent as to when that employment might start or what respondent would earn. There was no other evidence relating to respondent's estate, earnings or capacity to earn.

For the reasons stated the order must be reversed. The case is remanded for a hearing on respondent's ability to provide support. If...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Rosero v. Blake
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 13 Junio 2003
  • State of Minn., Clay County, on Behalf of Licha v. Doty
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 10 Noviembre 1982
    ...Clark, 139 So.2d 195, 197 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1962); Martin v. Coffey, 83 Mich.App. 113, 268 N.W.2d 307, 308 (1978); Barringer v. Barringer, 24 N.C.App. 142, 210 S.E.2d 90 (1974); State ex rel. Fulton v. Fulton, 31 Or.App. 669, 571 P.2d 179, 180 (1977). Cf. Kline v. Kline, 260 Ark. 550, 542 S.......
  • Stanislaus County v. Pratt
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 28 Marzo 1985
    ...judgment. In some states by statute the petition is taken as true unless the defendant proves otherwise. See Barringer v. Barringer, 24 N.C.App. 142, 210 S.E.2d 90 (1974); State ex rel. Fulton v. Fulton, 31 Or.App. 669, 571 P.2d 179, 180 (1977); State ex rel. Ivory v. Lewis, 660 S.W.2d 797,......
  • State v. Reindell
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 4 Diciembre 1974

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT