Nitco Holding Corp. v. Zareh Boujikian James B. Murray

Bad Law
491 F.3d 1086·2007 WL 1805548·67 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1421·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 15097
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 25, 200705-16438California1,290 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thomas, J.

In this appeal, we consider the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., 546 U.S. 394 , 126 S.Ct. 980 , 163 L.Ed.2d 974 (2006). Applying Unitherm, we conclude that a party procedurally defaults a civil appeal based on the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict if it fails to file a post-verdict motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b). We further conclude under Unit-herm that a procedurally barred sufficiency challenge is not subject to plain error review but is considered forfeited. Because a Rule 50(b) motion was not filed in this ease, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

I

Real estate agents Zareh Boujikian and James B. Murray entered into oral contracts with a third party, Dr. Dennis Streeter, for the payment of real estate commissions, to compensate for their assistance with a land transaction. Nitco Holding Corporation (“Nitco”), which had loaned a substantial amount of money to Streeter, sought and obtained a power of attorney that allowed it to act as Streeter’s agent in all negotiations related to the relevant land sale. After extended…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.