JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. This appeal concerns the allocation among different parties of an insurance payout resulting from a 2018 trial in the Western District of Tennessee. In that first case, the jury verdict included a $2.5 million award to John Falls, a Memphis musician and music businessman, under an insurance policy issued by Hanover American Insurance Company. Hanover moved under Rule 50(b) to set aside the verdict, and the district court granted its motion. On appeal, this court reversed and ordered the district court to reinstate the jury verdict. We held in that case that because Hanover had failed to make an initial 50(a) motion, it was therefore barred from making its Rule 50(b) motion. The $2.5 million payout then became the subject of an interpleader action (and a parallel state action between two of the three parties in this appeal). The district court initially enjoined the state action, but this court reversed. Then, the district court, on summary judgment, held that, applying principles of res judicata, the first trial and decision by this court precluded Hanover from making certain arguments against Falls as to the distribution of funds. After a bench trial, the district court found facts as to the value of the interests at stake and divided the funds, with the majority going to John Falls and the remainder to Christopher C. Brown, who owned the equipment insured by the policy. Hanover and Tattooed Millionaire Entertainment appeal. We affirm the district court’s decision. First, Hanover may not challenge Falls’s recovery, directly or indirectly, based on grounds and arguments it could have brought in the first case. Although the district court erred by interpreting the wrong lease for the purposes of its later analysis, we find this error harmless, because in the circumstances of this case it was correct to allocate the funds based on the value of the leasehold. Finally, the district court’s determination of the value of the leasehold and its resulting allocation was not clearly erroneous. We affirm the district court’s judgment.