Opinion
August 12, 1996
In an action, inter alia, for a judgment of possession and eviction, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated June 13, 1995, as denied its motion for summary judgment, and the defendant cross-appeals from so much of the same order as denied its cross motion for summary judgment and instead dismissed the complaint on the ground that it presents an ecclesiastical issue which the courts cannot resolve.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court properly determined that the dispute between these parties cannot be decided without resolving the underlying controversies over religious doctrine ( see, B'Nai Jacob v Park Slope Jewish Ctr., 199 A.D.2d 296; Park Slope Jewish Ctr. v Stern, 128 A.D.2d 847). Thus, judicial resolution of the dispute would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution ( see, Serbian Orthodox Diocese v Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, reh denied 429 U.S. 873; Kedroff v St. Nicholas Cathedral, 344 U.S. 94; Presbyterian Church v Hull Church, 393 U.S. 440, 449; First Presbyt. Church v United Presbyt. Church, 62 N.Y.2d 110, 119, rearg denied 63 N.Y.2d 676, cert denied 469 U.S. 1037). Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed. Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.