Omlid v. Lee

OPINION

LESLIE, Judge.

Defendant appeals claiming the jury’s verdict was excessive, respondent’s counsel made improper argument, and that surprise testimony mandates a new trial. We affirm.

FACTS

On December 14, 1980, respondent Timothy Omlid, then age 18, spent the evening drinking at a bar with some friends. He left the bar late that night with his friend, appellant Kent Lee, who agreed to drive Omlid home. At about 3:00 a.m., Sheila Fischer asked Lee for directions to Fargo. Lee offered to lead her part of the way. During this trip, Lee slowed down or stopped on the highway and Fischer’s car…