amounts of $19,905.51 for mortgage interest, property taxes, and maintenance expenses and $19,955.62 for lost rent? V. Did the district court err by determining that RTB is entitled to prejudgment interest under Minn.Stat. § 549.09, subd. 1(b) (2014), beginning on September 20, 2010? VI. Did the district court err by ordering Minnwest to pay $12,000 in administrative costs to correct the property line? ANALYSIS I. RTB argues that the district court erred by refusing to adopt the advisory jury’s finding that RTB is entitled to $100,563.75 in conveyance damages separate and distinct from the diminution-in-value damages award of $638,434. We review a district court’s decision to award or not award damages for an abuse of discretion. Gabler v. Fedoruk, 756 N.W.2d 725, 734 (Minn.App.2008) (<HOLDING>); see also Wenigar v. Johnson, 712 N.W.2d 190,
holding that it was necessary for this court to reach methodofvaluation arguments because the district court abused its discretion by incorrectly awarding damages holding district court abused its discretion in admitting state court findings of fact recognizing that an appellant seeking to establish that the district court abused its discretion must do so by a discussion of facts arguments and rulings that appear in the record holding that district court had not abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion to amend complaint holding that district court abused its discretion by denying plaintiffs motion to file fourth amended complaint