OFC Capital v. AT Publishing, Inc.

MEMORANDUM *

AT Publishing (“AT”) appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of OFC *482 Capital (“OFC”), and the district court’s order awarding OFC attorneys’ fees and costs. Because AT’s primary argument has been waived and its secondary arguments are unavailing, we affirm the judgment of the district court, as well as its post-judgment fees’ order.

AT’s failure to make a post-verdict motion challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict constitutes, on appeal, a waiver of issues arising from the denial of AT’s motion for judgment as a matter of law. See Nitco Holding Corp. v. Boujikian, 491 F.3d 1086, 1088 (9th Cir.2007).

The district court’s jury instructions fairly and adequately covered the issues presented, correctly stated the law, and were not misleading. See White v. Ford Motor Co., 312 F.3d 998, 1012 (9th Cir.2002). The district court did not misstate the law governing acceptance and rejection in those instructions, which referenced (1) the lease the parties signed; and (2) the requirement that AT be provided a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods received before its acceptance would be legally binding. See Ga.Code Ann. §…