Sauber (plaintiff) purchased a car from his brother. The brother had insurance on the car through Northland Insurance Co. (Northland) (defendant), which was still in effect when Sauber purchased it. Sauber contacted Northland to inquire whether he could drive the car under the insurance policy already in place. Sauber spoke with a lady at Northland who he stated told him he could drive the car under the policy. The car was thereafter wrecked. Northland refused to pay under the policy. Sauber and his brother filed suit. The brother’s suit was dismissed. Sauber’s suit went to trial and the jury returned a verdict for Sauber. Northland filed a motion notwithstanding the verdict and a motion for a new trial. The trial court denied Northland’s motion notwithstanding the verdict, but granted Northland’s motion for a new trial. Northland appealed the denial of its motion. Sauber appealed the trial court’s grant of Northlands motion for a new trial.