Opinion
No. COA12–198.
2012-08-7
HAYWOOD BUILDERS SUPPLY CO., INC., A North Carolina Corporation, Plaintiff v. Richard SCANLON, Defendant.
Jeffrey W. Norris and Jerad Davis of Jeffrey W. Norris & Associates, PLLC, attorneys for plaintiff. Agatha B. Guy of MELROSE, SEAGO & LAY, P.A., attorney for defendant.
Appeal by plaintiff from orders entered 29 July 2011 and 19 October 2011 by Judge Donna Forga in Haywood County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 June 2012. Jeffrey W. Norris and Jerad Davis of Jeffrey W. Norris & Associates, PLLC, attorneys for plaintiff. Agatha B. Guy of MELROSE, SEAGO & LAY, P.A., attorney for defendant.
ELMORE, Judge.
Haywood Builders Supply Co., Inc. (plaintiff) appeals from two orders (1) granting Richard Scanlon's (defendant) motion to dismiss and (2) denying plaintiff's motion for reconsideration under Rule 60(b). After careful consideration, we reverse and remand.
On 20 August 2009, defendant, a general contractor, opened an account with plaintiff, a seller and distributor of building supplies. On 2 February 2011, plaintiff filed suit against defendant in Haywood County District Court Small Claims Division for failure to pay his last statement balance of $3,173.63. In filing its suit, plaintiff used a standard form provided by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). On the form titled “complaint for money owed” plaintiff checked the box “on an account” and entered the amount $3,173.63. The form required a copy of the account to be attached, and plaintiff submitted a statement dated 25 January 2011, showing the balance of defendant's account.
On 2 March 2011, the small claims court found that plaintiff “failed to prove the case by the greater weight of the evidence” and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff then appealed to the district court of Haywood County. Defendant answered with a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
On 23 July 2011 the trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff then filed a motion for reconsideration and/or relief under Rule 60(b). On 19 October 2011, that motion was denied by the trial court. Plaintiff now appeals.
Plaintiff first argues that the trial court erred in granting defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss because its complaint was sufficient to state a claim for relief. We agree.
The motion to dismiss under N.C.R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. In ruling on the motion the allegations of the complaint must be viewed as admitted, and on that basis the court must determine as a matter of law whether the allegations state a claim for which relief may be granted.
Stanback v. Stanback, 297 N.C. 181, 185, 254 S.E.2d 611, 615 (1979) (citations omitted). “This Court must conduct a de novo review of the pleadings to determine their legal sufficiency and to determine whether the trial court's ruling on the motion to dismiss was correct.” Leary v. N.C. Forest Prods., Inc., 157 N.C.App. 396, 400, 580 S.E.2d 1, 4 (2003), aff'd per curiam, 357 N.C. 567, 597 S.E.2d 673 (2003).
Here, plaintiff filed suit for money owed on an account, which is a simple breach of contract claim. “The elements of a claim for breach of contract are (1) existence of a valid contract and (2) breach of the terms of that contract.” D.G. II, LLC v. Nix, –––, N.C.App. ––––, ––––, 712 S.E.2d 335, 339 (2011) (quotations and citations omitted).
Plaintiff's complaint alleged that “defendant owes me the amount listed for the following reason: 3,173.63” “[o]n an account[.]” When these allegations are viewed as admitted, they clearly establish (1) that plaintiff and defendant had an open account and (2) that defendant failed to pay the money owed on that account.
Thus, we conclude that the allegations of plaintiff's complaint were sufficient to state a claim for relief. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the trial court and remand for further proceedings. As such, we need not address plaintiff's remaining argument on appeal, that the trial court erred in denying its motion for reconsideration under Rule 60(b).
Reversed and remanded.