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.
8 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 36 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Starkman v. Evans.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Starkman v. Evans Anchor | green | “probably most important is whether plaintiff 'engaged in activities traditionally considered ecclesiastical or religious.” | 5 |
| 2 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Raleigh, North Carolina Sacred Heart Cathedral | green | “function of the position at issue” | 5 |
| 3 | Pardue v. Center City Consortium Schools of the Archdiocese of Washington, Inc. | green | “answerable to the religious authorities for providing, in a myriad of ways not reducible to a listing of tasks, 'spiritual leadership in and for the youth ministry.” | 5 |
| 4 | Pardue v. Center City Consortium Schools of the Archdiocese of Washington, Inc. | green | “determination of whose voice speaks for the church is per se a religious matter.” | 5 |
| 5 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Elizabeth McDonough v. The Catholic University of America | green | “encompasses all employees of a religious institution, whether ordained or not, whose primary functions serve its spiritual and pastoral mission.” | 4 |
| 6 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Raleigh, North Carolina Sacred Heart Cathedral | green | “exception would not apply to employment decisions concerning purely custodial or administrative personnel . . . where no spiritual function is involved.” | 4 |
| 7 | Gloria Alicea-Hernandez v. The Catholic Bishop of Chicago, a Corporation Sole | green | “determining whose voice speaks for the church is per se a religious matter,” | 4 |
| 8 | Ferman Shaliehsabou v. Hebrew Home of Greater Washington, Incorporated | green | “mashgiach," who was responsible for maintaining kosher kitchen, was minister "given the importance of dietary laws to the jewish religion” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.