from, relates to, and concerns (1) the [NAC’s] investigation of complaints against [Reverend Greer] about his performance of duties as a minister, (2) Alford’s involvement in that investigation, (3) information gathered in that investigation, (4) the findings of that investigation, (5) information allegedly known to Alford, the District, and the [NAC] as a result of that investigation, and (6) its attempts to impose discipline upon [Reverend Greer] as a result of its investigative findings and the governing ecclesiastical law.” The circuit court denied the petitioners’ motion to dismiss, and the petitioners filed the present petition for a writ of mandamus, which requests that this Court direct t 999) (unpublished decision); Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321, 325-26 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (<HOLDING>).” Malicki v. Doe, 814 So.2d 347, 359 n. 10
holding that first amendment barred adults breach of fiduciary duty claim against pastor for actions that occurred when parishioner was a minor holding that causes of actions against directors of corporations for breach of fiduciary duty are contract actions holding that first amendment barred parishioners negligent hiring and supervision and breach of fiduciary duty claims against pastor and church for sexual contact that occurred between pastor and parishioner during the course of a counseling relationship holding that claim of breach of fiduciary duty against pastor for sexual relationship with parishioner during the course of pastoral counseling was tantamount to impermissible clergy malpractice claim holding that first amendment barred adult parishioner who engaged in sexual relationship with priest during the course of pastoral counseling from bringing intentional infliction of emotional distress negligence and breach of fiduciary duty claims