Auto accidents hurt everyone. Wife became the named insured on an auto policy originally issued to her ex-husband. She got into an accident and obtained a sizable verdict against the insurer based on its failure to offer personal injury protection (PIP) options anew at the time she became insured. The core holding of the court of appeals was to uphold reformation of the policy to include the maximum PIP benefits that would have been offered had they been offered at the time the policy was issued to the ex-wife. But two other holdings may have wider applicability. One, a motion for a new trial does not preserve an issue for appeal presented as an issue of law. For that, a motion for “judgment notwithstanding verdict” is required. Second, a complaint may be amended to include punitive damages at the close of evidence if the defendant presented evidence contradicting the claim during trial.