by denying its requests for conveyance damages and for injunctive relief. ISSUES I. Did the district court err by denying RTB conveyance damages for the encroached-upon land it was ordered to convey to Minnwest? II. Did the district court err by awarding diminution-in-value damages to RTB in the amount of $638,434? III. Did the district court err by denying RTB injunctive relief requiring removal of Building B from Outlot M? IV. Did the district court err by awarding damages to RTB in 9- (Minn.App.2006) (noting that whether a district court’s award of damages is proper -is reviewed under an abuse-of-discretion standard); Robert W. Carl-strom Co. v. German Evangelical Lutheran St. Paul’s Congregation of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession■ at Jordan, 662 N.W.2d 168, 173 (Minn.App.2003) (<HOLDING>). The district court' concluded that an award
holding that the record supported the district courts award of damages holding that a district courts ruling may be upheld on an alternative ground supported by the record holding that the district courts finding of no discrimination under title vii was not clearly erroneous because the finding was supported by the record holding that the district courts finding of no discrimination was not clearly erroneous because the finding was supported by the record holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages