establishment clause (Iowa) · Go Syfert
← Iowa issues

establishment clause in Iowa

13 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1877–2018 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Bussmanngreen
minn · 2007 · cited in 2 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See generally 741 N.W.2d 79 (Minn. 2007).6 A majority of the court found an Establishment Clause violation as applied to the facts of the defendant’s trial because “[t]he state relied heavily on religious expert testimony to prove its case and the court allowed the jury to hear discussion that intertwined religious doctrine with state law.” Id. at 92 .

2014See generally 741 N.W.2d 79 (Minn. 2007).6 A majority of the court found an Establishment Clause violation as applied to the facts of the defendant’s trial because “[t]he state relied heavily on religious expert testimony to prove its case and the court allowed the jury to hear discussion that intertwined religious doctrine with state law.” Id. at 92 .

22
Reiss v. ICI Seeds, Inc.green
iowactapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
1 sentence

2018See id.

11
Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Buildings, Inc.green
sd · 1991 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999“The essential test for waiver of arbitration requires conduct or activity inconsistent with the right to arbitration and prejudice to the party claiming waiver.” Clinton Nat’l Bank, 559 N.W.2d at 284 (quoting Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Bldgs., Inc., 466 N.W.2d 643, 645 (S.D.1991)) (emphasis in original).

11
Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equalization of Californiagreen
scotus · 1990 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990
1 sentence

1990Id., — U.S. at -, 110 S.Ct. at 699, 107 L.Ed.2d at 813 (citations omitted).

11
Lemon v. Kurtzmanred
scotus · 1971 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990
2 sentences

1990Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 613 , 91 S.Ct. 2105, 2111 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745, 756 (1971).

1990Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 613 , 91 S.Ct. 2105, 2111 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745, 756 (1971).

11
Merryman v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.green
iowa · 1892 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1911–1911
1 sentence

1911See Merryman v. Railroad Co., 85 Iowa, 634 ; Masser v. Railroad Co., 68 Iowa, 602 ; Carson v. Railroad Co., 96 Iowa, 583 ; Brown v. Canning Co., 132 Iowa, 634 ; Keefe v. Electric Co., 21 R.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

CaseCitedYears
Clinton National Bank v. Kirk Gross Co. green
iowa · 1997
1 sentence

1999“The essential test for waiver of arbitration requires conduct or activity inconsistent with the right to arbitration and prejudice to the party claiming waiver.” Clinton Nat’l Bank, 559 N.W.2d at 284 (quoting Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Bldgs., Inc., 466 N.W.2d 643, 645 (S.D.1991)) (emphasis in original).

11999–1999
Kartridg Pak Co. v. Department of Revenue green
iowa · 1985
1 sentence

1990Id., — U.S. at -, 110 S.Ct. at 699, 107 L.Ed.2d at 813 (citations omitted).

11990–1990
Md. & Va. Churches v. Sharpsburg Ch. green
scotus · 1970
2 sentences

1976Maryland & Virginia Eldership of Churches of God, Inc. v. Church of God, Inc., 396 U.S. 367 , 90 S.Ct. 499 , 24 L.Ed.2d 582 (1970); Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial Presbyterian Church, supra, (2) the exemption of property used for religious purposes from taxation.

1976Maryland & Virginia Eldership of Churches of God, Inc. v. Church of God, Inc., 396 U.S. 367 , 90 S.Ct. 499 , 24 L.Ed.2d 582 (1970); Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial Presbyterian Church, supra, (2) the exemption of property used for religious purposes from taxation.

11976–1976
Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist green
scotus · 1973
1 sentence

1976Primary among those evils have been ‘sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activities.’ (Authorities).” Drawing from what it described as “the full sweep of the establishment clause cases” the United States Supreme Court in Nyquist, supra, laid down a three part test for determining whether laws which aid religious institutions violate the clause: “ * * * [T]o pass muster under the Establishment Clause the law in question first must reflect a clearly secular legislative purpose, (Authority), second, must have a primary effect that neither advances

11976–1976
O'Connell v. Chicago Park District green
ill · 1941
2 sentences

1944In case such peremptory injunction has issued against the bringing of actions against the receiver or against the owner of the property of which he is receiver, the holder of a claim liable to be tolled by the statute of limitations may seek relief by petitioning the court which appointed the receiver and issued the injunction for leave to bring an action at law or suit in equity, and to modify the injunction accordingly, or for leave to file an intervening petition for the establishment of his claim. ’ ’ In O’Connell v. Chicago Park District, 376 Ill. 550, 557 , 34 N. E. 2d 836, 840 , 135 A.

1944In case such peremptory injunction has issued against the bringing of actions against the receiver or against the owner of the property of which he is receiver, the holder of a claim liable to be tolled by the statute of limitations may seek relief by petitioning the court which appointed the receiver and issued the injunction for leave to bring an action at law or suit in equity, and to modify the injunction accordingly, or for leave to file an intervening petition for the establishment of his claim. ’ ’ In O’Connell v. Chicago Park District, 376 Ill. 550, 557 , 34 N. E. 2d 836, 840 , 135 A.

11944–1944
Brady v. Mattern green
iowa · 1904
2 sentences

1939Brady v. Mattern, 125 Iowa 158 , 100 N. W. 358 , 106 Am.

1939Brady v. Mattern, 125 Iowa 158 , 100 N. W. 358 , 106 Am.

11939–1939
Peterson v. Johnson green
iowa · 1927
2 sentences

1937Lamm v. Sooy, 79 Iowa 593 , 44 N. W. 893 ; Peterson v. Johnson, 205 Iowa 16 , 212 N. W. 138 .

1937Lamm v. Sooy, 79 Iowa 593 , 44 N. W. 893 ; Peterson v. Johnson, 205 Iowa 16 , 212 N. W. 138 .

11937–1937
Lamm v. Sooy neutral
· 1890
2 sentences

1937Lamm v. Sooy, 79 Iowa 593 , 44 N. W. 893 ; Peterson v. Johnson, 205 Iowa 16 , 212 N. W. 138 .

1937Lamm v. Sooy, 79 Iowa 593 , 44 N. W. 893 ; Peterson v. Johnson, 205 Iowa 16 , 212 N. W. 138 .

11937–1937
Swartzendruber v. Polke green
iowa · 1928
2 sentences

1934Myers v. Wendel, 198 Iowa 859 , 200 N. W. 431 ; Swartzendruber v. Polke, 205 Iowa 382 , 218 N. W. 62, 65 .

1934Myers v. Wendel, 198 Iowa 859 , 200 N. W. 431 ; Swartzendruber v. Polke, 205 Iowa 382 , 218 N. W. 62, 65 .

11934–1934
Myers v. Wendel neutral
iowa · 1924
1 sentence

1934Myers v. Wendel, 198 Iowa 859 , 200 N. W. 431 ; Swartzendruber v. Polke, 205 Iowa 382 , 218 N. W. 62, 65 .

11934–1934
Masser v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R'y Co. green
iowa · 1886
1 sentence

1911See Merryman v. Railroad Co., 85 Iowa, 634 ; Masser v. Railroad Co., 68 Iowa, 602 ; Carson v. Railroad Co., 96 Iowa, 583 ; Brown v. Canning Co., 132 Iowa, 634 ; Keefe v. Electric Co., 21 R.

11911–1911
Carson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. neutral
iowa · 1896
1 sentence

1911See Merryman v. Railroad Co., 85 Iowa, 634 ; Masser v. Railroad Co., 68 Iowa, 602 ; Carson v. Railroad Co., 96 Iowa, 583 ; Brown v. Canning Co., 132 Iowa, 634 ; Keefe v. Electric Co., 21 R.

11911–1911
Springer v. Bartle green
iowa · 1877
1 sentence

1888The case is distinguishable from Springer v. Bartle, 46 Iowa, 688 , and Broquet v. Sterling, 56 Iowa, 358 , cited by counsel.

11888–1888
Cooley v. Smith neutral
· 1864
1 sentence

1877Cooley v. Smith, 17 Iowa, 99 .

11877–1877

Where else courts name it

CA 89 (1921–2025) NY 53 (1861–2026) FL 43 (1938–2026) OH 42 (1953–2025) WA 42 (1895–2026) MI 39 (1909–2020) IL 39 (1887–2021) PA 39 (1917–2024) NJ 37 (1897–2019) WI 31 (1844–2020) MA 29 (1910–2018) TX 28 (1912–2023) MD 24 (1914–2023) CO 24 (1892–2015) CT 22 (1923–2025) OR 22 (1895–2025) MN 17 (1926–2016) AL 16 (1868–2015) AR 15 (1908–2021) OK 14 (1913–2024) IA 13 (1877–2018) NM 12 (1888–2015) LA 12 (1917–2000) TN 12 (1917–2013) GA 11 (1925–2023) NE 10 (1886–2003) AZ 10 (1960–2016) MO 10 (1906–2011) KS 10 (1901–1996) KY 9 (1899–2023) MS 8 (1950–2005) UT 8 (1986–2022) IN 8 (1942–2005) VA 8 (1925–2015) ME 7 (1844–2006) ID 7 (1890–1996) NC 7 (1874–2011) MT 6 (1878–2012) SC 5 (1846–2021) VT 5 (1979–2017) DC 5 (1982–1997) HI 5 (1987–2020) ND 4 (1895–1986) AK 4 (1979–2022) NV 4 (1959–2022) WV 4 (1950–2014) NH 4 (1967–1995) RI 2 (1919–1980) DE 2 (1974–1990) PR 2 (1942–1956)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check