Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for United States and Canada v. Milivojevichgreen2 sentences2026Orthodox Diocese for U. S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 (1976) (“For where resolution of the disputes cannot be made without extensive inquiry by civil courts into religious law and polity, the First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); New Jerusalem Church of God, Inc. v. Sneads Cmty. Church, Inc., 147 So. 3d 25, 30 2017Orthodox Diocese for U.S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 , 49 L.Ed.2d 151 (1976) ("First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); Watson, 80 U.S. at 729 (“But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if any one aggrieved by one of their decisions could appe | 2 | 5 |
New Jerusalem Church of God, Inc. v. Sneads Community Church, Inc.green1 sentence2026Orthodox Diocese for U. S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 (1976) (“For where resolution of the disputes cannot be made without extensive inquiry by civil courts into religious law and polity, the First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); New Jerusalem Church of God, Inc. v. Sneads Cmty. Church, Inc., 147 So. 3d 25, 30 | 1 | 1 |
Watson v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2017See, e.g., Kedroff, 344 U.S. 94 , 73 S.Ct. 143 (statute transferring control of churches violates free exercise of religion); Watson, 80 U.S. 679 (pre-incorporation case involving dispute between members of church); Rosenberger v. Jamison, 72 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (holding that because- “the underlying dispute concerns the Church's form of governance . . the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from adjudicating such ecclesiastical matters”); Archdiocese of Miami, 945 So.2d at 532 (adjudicating Catholic priest's claim to workers compensation "would excessively entangle civil cou 2017Orthodox Diocese for U.S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 , 49 L.Ed.2d 151 (1976) ("First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); Watson, 80 U.S. at 729 (“But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if any one aggrieved by one of their decisions could appe | 1 | 1 |
Kedroff v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church in North Americagreen2 sentences2017See, e.g., Kedroff, 344 U.S. 94 , 73 S.Ct. 143 (statute transferring control of churches violates free exercise of religion); Watson, 80 U.S. 679 (pre-incorporation case involving dispute between members of church); Rosenberger v. Jamison, 72 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (holding that because- “the underlying dispute concerns the Church's form of governance . . the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from adjudicating such ecclesiastical matters”); Archdiocese of Miami, 945 So.2d at 532 (adjudicating Catholic priest's claim to workers compensation "would excessively entangle civil cou 2017See, e.g., Kedroff, 344 U.S. 94 , 73 S.Ct. 143 (statute transferring control of churches violates free exercise of religion); Watson, 80 U.S. 679 (pre-incorporation case involving dispute between members of church); Rosenberger v. Jamison, 72 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (holding that because- “the underlying dispute concerns the Church's form of governance . . the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from adjudicating such ecclesiastical matters”); Archdiocese of Miami, 945 So.2d at 532 (adjudicating Catholic priest's claim to workers compensation "would excessively entangle civil cou | 1 | 1 |
Kevin McCarthy v. Patricia Fullergreen2 sentences2017Orthodox Diocese for U.S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 , 49 L.Ed.2d 151 (1976) ("First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); Watson, 80 U.S. at 729 (“But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if any one aggrieved by one of their decisions could appe 2017Orthodox Diocese for U.S. of Am. & Canada v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 , 49 L.Ed.2d 151 (1976) ("First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them.”); Watson, 80 U.S. at 729 (“But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if any one aggrieved by one of their decisions could appe | 1 | 1 |
Malichi v. Archdiocese of Miamigreen1 sentence2017See, e.g., Kedroff, 344 U.S. 94 , 73 S.Ct. 143 (statute transferring control of churches violates free exercise of religion); Watson, 80 U.S. 679 (pre-incorporation case involving dispute between members of church); Rosenberger v. Jamison, 72 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (holding that because- “the underlying dispute concerns the Church's form of governance . . the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from adjudicating such ecclesiastical matters”); Archdiocese of Miami, 945 So.2d at 532 (adjudicating Catholic priest's claim to workers compensation "would excessively entangle civil cou | 1 | 1 |
Rosenberger v. Jamisongreen1 sentence2017See, e.g., Kedroff, 344 U.S. 94 , 73 S.Ct. 143 (statute transferring control of churches violates free exercise of religion); Watson, 80 U.S. 679 (pre-incorporation case involving dispute between members of church); Rosenberger v. Jamison, 72 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (holding that because- “the underlying dispute concerns the Church's form of governance . . the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from adjudicating such ecclesiastical matters”); Archdiocese of Miami, 945 So.2d at 532 (adjudicating Catholic priest's claim to workers compensation "would excessively entangle civil cou | 1 | 1 |
Mills v. Baldwingreen1 sentence2013Florida adopted the deference approach to church property disputes in Mills v. Baldwin, 362 So.2d 2, 7 (Fla.1978), wherein the Florida Supreme Court held that, when a portion of the congregation of a local church withdrew from a hierarchical church with which the local church had been affiliated, ownership of the property of the local church did not transfer to the separating body, but remained with the congregation that remained loyal to and recognized by the hierarchical church. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Southeastern Conference Ass'n of Seventh-Day Adventists, Inc. v. Dennis
green
1 sentence2006Orthodox Diocese for the U.S. & Can. v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 709 , 96 S.Ct. 2372, 2380 , 49 L.Ed.2d 151, 162 (1976) (stating that where resolution of ecclesiastical disputes cannot be made without extensive inquiry by civil courts into religious law and polity, "the First and Fourteenth Amendments mandate that civil courts shall not disturb the decisions of the highest ecclesiastical tribunal within a church of hierarchical polity, but must accept such decisions as binding on them, in their application to the religious issues of doctrine or polity before them."); Dennis, 862 So.2d at 84 | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Maryland & Virginia Eldership of the Churches of God v. Church of God at Sharpsburg, Inc.
green
2 sentences2002Id. at 708-09 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 (emphasis added) (citations omitted) (quoting Maryland & Va. Eldership v. Church of God, 396 U.S. 367, 369 , 90 S.Ct. 499 , 24 L.Ed.2d 582 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring)). 2002Id. at 708-09 , 96 S.Ct. 2372 (emphasis added) (citations omitted) (quoting Maryland & Va. Eldership v. Church of God, 396 U.S. 367, 369 , 90 S.Ct. 499 , 24 L.Ed.2d 582 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring)). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.