Brian Vukadinovich, a former staff member of retired Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner, has petitioned the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the dismissal of his wage theft claims against the ex-judge. Vukadinovich contends that the Indiana federal court overseeing his case permitted a flawed discovery process and prematurely dismissed his claims despite unresolved factual issues.
In 2018, following Judge Posner’s retirement from the bench, he established the Posner Center of Justice for Pro Se’s, an initiative aimed at assisting self-represented litigants. Vukadinovich, a former high school teacher, was recruited to serve as co-executive director of the center. He alleges that Posner orally agreed to compensate him with an annual salary of $120,000, personally guaranteeing the payment regardless of the center’s financial status. However, Vukadinovich claims he was not paid $170,000 for his services.
In May 2025, U.S. District Judge Theresa Springmann dismissed Vukadinovich’s lawsuit, ruling that the oral agreement was unenforceable under Indiana law, which requires such contracts to be executable within one year. Additionally, the court found that Vukadinovich’s claim for unjust enrichment was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. Posner’s legal team also highlighted his Alzheimer’s diagnosis, questioning his capacity to enter into binding agreements. Vukadinovich has expressed his intention to appeal the decision, alleging judicial bias within the Seventh Circuit.
Vukadinovich’s appeal raises significant questions about the enforceability of oral employment agreements and the procedural handling of wage theft claims. The outcome of this case could have broader implications for employment law, particularly concerning the rights of employees in non-traditional work arrangements and the legal responsibilities of employers in similar contexts.