religious doctrine (Michigan) · Go Syfert
← Michigan issues

religious doctrine in Michigan

8 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2021 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Michigan 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
MacIejewski v. Breitenbeck green
michctapp · 1987
2 sentences

2021“Religious doctrine refers to ritual, liturgy of worship and tenets of the faith.” Maciejewski v Breitenbeck, 162 Mich App 410, 414 ; 413 NW2d 65 (1987), citing Jones v Wolf, 443 US 595 ; 99 S Ct 3020 ; 61 L Ed 2d 775 (1979).1 1.

2021“Religious doctrine refers to ritual, liturgy of worship and tenets of the faith.” Maciejewski v Breitenbeck, 162 Mich App 410, 414 ; 413 NW2d 65 (1987), citing Jones v Wolf, 443 US 595 ; 99 S Ct 3020 ; 61 L Ed 2d 775 (1979).1 1.

51999–2021
Jones v. Wolf green
scotus · 1979
2 sentences

2021“Religious doctrine refers to ritual, liturgy of worship and tenets of the faith.” Maciejewski v Breitenbeck, 162 Mich App 410, 414 ; 413 NW2d 65 (1987), citing Jones v Wolf, 443 US 595 ; 99 S Ct 3020 ; 61 L Ed 2d 775 (1979).1 1.

2021“Religious doctrine refers to ritual, liturgy of worship and tenets of the faith.” Maciejewski v Breitenbeck, 162 Mich App 410, 414 ; 413 NW2d 65 (1987), citing Jones v Wolf, 443 US 595 ; 99 S Ct 3020 ; 61 L Ed 2d 775 (1979).1 1.

31987–2021
Hough v. North Star Baptist Church neutral
michctapp · 1981
2 sentences

1984"The party alleging a First Amendment violation has the burden of proving that the regulation in question imposes a burden or restriction on the exercise of his or her religious beliefs.” Hough v North Star Baptist Church, 109 Mich App 780, 783 ; 312 NW2d 158 (1981).

1984"The party alleging a First Amendment violation has the burden of proving that the regulation in question imposes a burden or restriction on the exercise of his or her religious beliefs.” Hough v North Star Baptist Church, 109 Mich App 780, 783 ; 312 NW2d 158 (1981).

11984–1984

Where else courts name it

CA 16 (1957–2025) TX 13 (1984–2020) NY 12 (1960–2026) TN 10 (1993–2006) NC 9 (1979–2022) MI 8 (1984–2021) WA 7 (1982–2011) NJ 6 (1977–2016) OH 5 (1988–2004) MN 5 (1976–2013) KY 5 (1934–2011) WI 4 (1963–2022) NM 4 (1991–2019) AR 4 (1988–1998) IL 4 (1917–1990) NV 3 (1975–2017) CO 3 (1927–1996) MD 3 (1958–1965) MA 3 (1992–1996) GA 3 (2002–2011) NE 3 (1941–2019) PA 3 (1954–1975) AL 3 (1973–1980) IA 3 (1994–2014) KS 3 (1973–2011) MT 2 (2005–2005) MS 2 (1970–2022) NH 2 (2005–2013) IN 2 (1976–1988) VA 2 (1967–2013) ND 2 (1987–2000) SC 2 (1985–2018) FL 2 (1960–2018) ME 2 (2005–2021) OR 2 (2005–2006) MO 2 (2019–2025) CT 2 (1970–1995) DC 2 (2015–2023)

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