McGlathery v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There were no property interests involved, nothing touching what are termed the temporalities of the church as contradistinguished from its spiritual-ities. The petitioner had no pecuniary interests, in any direction, involved in the proceeding, and it did not touch any of his civil rights at any point. It may be, the church proceeded irregularly according to common usage in such cases; but it is averred, that this church ‘is of the denomination known as “Disciples of Christ,” of which Alexander Campbell was the original preacher, if not the founder,’ and that ‘each church is of itself independent, not subject to the control of any higher or other ecclesiastical judicature.’ As an ecclesiastical body, therefore, it was a law unto itself, self-governing and amenable to no court, ecclesiastical or civil,' in the discharge of its religious functions. It could make and unmake its rules and regulations for the reception and exclusion of members, and in reference to other matters; and what other body religious or civil could question its right to do so? Certainly, if it violated no civil law, the arm of civil authority was short to reach it. Admitting, therefore, as we must on demurrer, that petitioner had no notice of this proceeding, and- that it was irregular according to common usage,. the church being independent, and not subject to higher powers, and being a law unto itself for its own procedure in religious matters, what it did towards the expul-si(?n of petitioner was not ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. King v. Tatum · 242 So. 3d 979 - Taylor v. Paradise Missionary Baptist Church

2. “"[I]t is the nature of the underlying dispute that determines whether a court has jurisdiction to consider matters of church procedure. As Hundley [v. Collins , 131 Ala. 234 , 32 So. 575 (1902),] clearly articulates, if the substantive dispute is spiritual or ecclesiastical in nature, it is irrelevant to the civil court whether the church followed its own procedures, per se; the civil court has no jurisdiction to consider the matter. See also, e.g., Caples v. Nazareth Church of Hopewell Ass'n , 245 Ala. 656 , 18 So.2d 383 (1944). Accord Sale v. First Regular Baptist Church , 62 Iowa 26 , 17 N.W. 143 (1883) ; and Evans v. Shiloh Baptist Church , 196 Md. 543 , 77 A.2d 160 (1950)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. King v. Tatum · 242 So. 3d 979 - Taylor v. Paradise Missionary Baptist Church

3. “These views are in accord with the decisions of other States and of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 242 So. 3d 979 - Taylor v. Paradise Missionary Baptist Church