With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the results of the investigation conducted by the Conference, into the factual findings that formed the basis for .the resolution, and into the Conference’s decision to remove [the pastor and his son] from [the church]. ... For these reasons, the trial court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over [the pastor’s] claims against [the lay member] by virtue of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” 103 So.3d at 72 (emphasis added). In the present case, the plaintiffs’ negligent hiring, supervision, and retention claims are intertwined with the petitioners’ investigations and decisions concerning Reverend Greer’s employment and discipline. As set out above, the basis for the plaintiffs’ claims deriv Omaha, 244 Neb. 715, 508 N.W.2d 907, 911-13 (1993) (<HOLDING>); Wisconsin: L.L.N. v. Clauder, 209 Wis.2d 674,

A: holding that first amendment barred child victim of sexual abuse by priest from bringing breach of fiduciary duty claim against priest church official and church
B: holding that first amendment barred negligent supervision claim against a church regarding sexual relationship between adult parishioner and priest during the course of a marital counseling
C: holding that first amendment barred consideration of negligent supervision claim against diocese for sexual relationship between adult parishioner and priest while the priest was counseling the parishioner in his position as a hospital chaplain
D: 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
D.