Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc.
4 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2015–2021)
2 trusted published court opinions across 1 distinct case
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. as an employer in 4 distinct federal employment cases between 2015 and 2021.
The most common claims on record were Wrongful Termination, Breach Of Contract, and Retaliation.
Cases were filed across 1 state (DC).
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Written decisions across 1 distinct case.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. appears in 2 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Judd v. Service Employees International Union Local 32bj (2021) — Dismissed. This case involved a dispute between an individual named Judd and Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ, filed in federal court in April 2021. Unfortunately, the specific details of what triggered this employment-related conflict are not available in the public records. Read the ruling.
Judd v. Service Employees International Union Local 32bj (2020) — Dismissed. This case involved a dispute between someone named Judd and Service Employees International Union Local 32bj, a large union that represents service workers like janitors, security guards, and building maintenance staff. The case was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. in September 2020. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wrongful Termination, Breach of Contract, Retaliation. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wrongful Termination, Breach of Contract and Retaliation.
Published opinions span District of Columbia. District of Columbia is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. District of Columbia rulings.
These published opinions sit within the nonprofit sector, where mission-alignment defenses sometimes complicate Title VII analysis.
Claim Types
States
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other Nonprofit employers
Browse trusted published opinions involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.