Timeliness Sinks Unjust Enrichment Claim
Although unjust enrichment can sometimes provide a legal remedy when a contract is unenforceable, that path was also closed to Vukadinovich. He argued the claim accrued in July 2020 when payment was allegedly due. But the court determined the clock started ticking in July 2019, when Vukadinovich ceased working for the center—placing the May 2022 filing outside the allowable window.
“The court concludes that there is no genuine dispute of material fact” regarding the statute of limitations, Judge Springmann said in her decision.
Plaintiff Decries Ruling, Vows to Appeal
Vukadinovich, who represented himself throughout the case, expressed outrage in comments to Law360, describing the ruling as “corrupt and rotten to the core” and claiming the proceeding was “rigged.”
He also criticized the court’s denial of his request to reopen discovery, accusing Judge Springmann of shielding Posner and his legal team from potential exposure to “tax and financial crimes.” The court rejected that assertion, with Judge Springmann affirming the magistrate judge’s earlier ruling that discovery had been properly closed.
Vukadinovich stated that he intends to appeal the decision and will seek to have the matter heard in a different district.
