Legal Opinion

Beulah Pilgrim Holiness Church v. Otto

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided April 30, 2018No. 17–P–418Published

1Opinion of the Court

Pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 64(a), as amended, 423 Mass. 1403 (1996), a Housing Court judge reported his August 31, 2015, interlocutory order (order) for review and determination whether the Housing Court has subject matter jurisdiction to resolve a church property dispute between two factions of the Beulah Pilgrim Holiness Church (church). In the order, the judge concluded that the court had jurisdiction to determine the ultimate issue in a summary process action that Terrance Davis, acting as a purported agent of the church, brought against four of its tenants.3 We answer the reported order…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Jones v. WolfSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. General Convention of the New Jerusalem in the United States of America, Inc. v. MacKenzieMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
  3. Fortin v. Roman Catholic BishopMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  4. Callahan v. First Congregational ChurchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004
  5. Wooten v. CraytonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API