Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-9 of 9
Former church member states defamation and breach of fiduciary duty claims against pastor and church
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Bilbrey v. Myers, No. 5D11-1036, 2012 WL 2465242 (Fla. 5th DCA June 29, 2012), the court of appeal reversed in part the trial court and held that a former church member could state a claim against First Pentecostal Church of South Brevard, Inc. and its pastor for defamation and breach of fiduciary duty under the “neutral principles” approach
Property dispute decided in favor of Missouri Church with Kansas property
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Colonial Presbyterian Church v. Heartland Presbytery, Case No. WD 74374, 2012 WL 2378232 (Mo.App. June 26, 2012), the Missouri Court of Appeals ruled that under the neutral principles of law approach, disputed church property was never conveyed in trust to the denomination and, thus, remained with the church
RLUIPA claim of home Bible study plaintiffs dismissed
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Salman v. City of Phoenix, Case No. CV 12-1219-PHX-JAT, 2012 WL 2261118 (D. Ariz. June 15, 2012), the court dismissed, based on the doctrine of res judicata and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, the plaintiffs’ RLUIPA and Arizona Freedom of Religious Exercise Act (RFRA) claims related to their multiple convictions for holding weekly Bible studies on their property in violation of the zoning code
Non-religious organization stated claim under RLUIPA when precluded from building chapel
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Anselmo v. Cnty. of Shasta, No. 2:12-361 WBS EFB, 2012 WL 2090437 (E.D. Cal. June 8, 2012), the court ruled that an individual and the non-religious organization of which he was the sole owner stated a claim under the “substantial burden” prong of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) when the county precluded him from building a chapel on his property
First Amendment precludes inquiry into misappropriation of church funds
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Askew v. T’ees of the General Assembly of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Inc., Case No. 11-1916, 2012 WL 2433497 (3d Cir. June 28, 2012), the Third Circuit held that the non-entanglement principle embedded in the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment prevented it from deciding whether a church and its officials were misappropriating church funds for personal use, breaching their fiduciary duty to the church, and failing to submit annual financial statements to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
City’s moratorium preventing church construction actionable
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Church v. City of Medina, Case No. 11-275 (MJDFLN), 2012 WL 2395195 (D. Minn. June 25, 2012), the plaintiff stated a facial challenge to the city’s zoning decision not to approve its construction plans and the city’s one-year building moratorium on all church construction enacted one month later
Timely Topics
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
Religious institutions and other charitable organizations must acknowledge their donors’ charitable contributions in a manner that satisfies applicable income tax laws
Injunction upheld granting denomination access and control over church and appointing new pastor
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Church of God in Christ, Inc. v. Bd. of T’ees of Emmanuel Church of God in Christ, Wichita, Case No. 104,859, 2012 WL 2053573 (Kan. App. June 8, 2012), the Kansas Court of Appeals concluded that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to resolve a church property dispute and so did the appellate court to review the matter
Compelled pregnancy-related speech struck
- Holland & Knight LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 17 2012
In Greater Baltimore Ctr. for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, No. 11-1111, 11-1885, 2012 WL 2402573 (4th Cir. June 27, 2012), the court ruled an ordinance unconstitutional that required any provider of pregnancy-related services that did not also provide or refer its clients for abortions or certain birth-control services (e.g., crisis pregnancy centers) to post a conspicuous sign in its waiting room to that effect
Current Search
- Jurisdiction - USA
- Workarea - Non-profit Organizations
- Author - Thomas John "Tom" Kinasz