The appellant appealed the dismissal of her medical malpractice action against an oculoplastic surgeon regarding cosmetic eyelid surgeries.
She alleged the trial judge erred in his findings on standard of care, informed consent, and the qualification of the respondent's expert witness.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings or his preference for the respondent's expert evidence.
The court also dismissed the appellant's motion to adduce fresh evidence, as it did not meet the Palmer test.
