I O N Appellants allege that 23 of the district court s findings of fact and six of its conclusions of law are clearly erroneous. As a threshold matter, appellants have waived several of these challenges by failing to offer argument or legal support. See Schoepke v. On appeal, findings made by the district court will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the district court to judge the credibility of the witnesses. Minn. R. Civ.
Appellants organize their objections into categories.
Agency Determination Appellants argue that the evidence as a whole does not support the district court s determination that Arena Systems was a mere agent of Rink Systems. Appellants misstate the record. Arena Systems is a Minnesota corporation, with corporate offices in Albert Lea. These three individuals are also Arena Systems officers and shareholders. But finding two does not say that Arena Systems was not an independent legal entity.