With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (1979). In Texas West Oil and Gas Corp. v. First Interstate Bank of Casper, 743 P.2d 857 (1987), reconfirmed, 749 P.2d 278 (Wyo.1988), we answered the narrower question of whether res judicata or collateral estoppel defenses can be sustained on a motion to dismiss. We concluded: This court follows the modern trend * * *, that if the information necessary for decision is available to the court by judicial notice, defendant can raise res judicata or collateral estoppel for consideration by a motion to dismiss. Id. at 858. These principles control the disposition of this case. Despite the fact that motions to dismiss are generally not favored, we hold that the district court properly decided that appellant’s petition to disestablish paternity was barre 2 S.Ct. 1400, 31 L.Ed.2d 768 (1972) (<HOLDING>); and Levy v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 68, 88 S.Ct.

A: recognizing that the child custody act required that the natural parent presumption must be seriously considered and heavily weighted in favor of the parent but that the presumption is rebutted if the clear and convincing evidence establishes that the best interest of the child is served by awarding custody to the third party
B: holding that penalizing the illegitimate child for the acts of the parent is an unconstitutional and ineffective deterrent and does not serve any state interest
C: holding that a superior court can adjudicate a child as a child in need of aid based on the acts of just one parent
D: holding that the word tort is not technically construed and hence a fathers breach of the statutory duty to pay child support for his illegitimate child constitutes a tortious act within the meaning of the statute
B.