Salvation Army
8 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1990–2026)
6 trusted published court opinions across 6 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Salvation Army as an employer in 8 distinct federal employment cases between 1990 and 2026.
Of the 6 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 2 ended in a ruling for the worker, 2 ended in a ruling for the employer, 1 were dismissed, and 1 were sent back to a lower court.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Whistleblower, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 3 states, most often in CO.
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 6 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Salvation Army appears in 6 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Spilman v. The Salvation Army (2026) — Remanded. A person in The Salvation Army's drug rehabilitation program sued the organization, claiming they were treated as an employee but not paid minimum wage. The Salvation Army argued the person was a program participant, not an employee, and therefore wasn't entitled to wages. Read the ruling.
Peterson v. Salvation Army, The (2025) — Defendant Win. Vanessa Peterson worked for The Salvation Army and filed a lawsuit claiming the organization discriminated against her based on disability, failed to accommodate her needs, created a hostile work environment, and forced her to quit (constructive discharge). Read the ruling.
Lankford v. The Salvation Army (2020) — Dismissed. Lankford filed a lawsuit against The Salvation Army claiming she faced discrimination and retaliation related to her pregnancy. She brought claims under both state law (ELCRA) and federal laws (Title VII and FMLA). Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (2 of 6), Whistleblower, Failure to Accommodate. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Whistleblower and Failure to Accommodate.
Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: NLRA (29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169) — The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects the rights of employees to organize, form or join labor unions, bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid or protection. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.
Published opinions span Colorado (1), Michigan (1), California (1). Colorado 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. Colorado rulings, Michigan rulings and California rulings.
These published opinions sit within the nonprofit sector, where mission-alignment defenses sometimes complicate Title VII analysis.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
6 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
What do these stages mean?
- Appeal
- A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
Published federal-court opinions only — most workplace disputes are resolved privately. This is not anyone’s odds, and not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Facing something similar? Check your rights →
Claim Types
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.