The moving party dentist sought leave to appeal an order refusing partial summary judgment to dismiss the responding party's claim for damages arising out of an alleged geographic tongue injury.
The moving party argued there was no evidence linking his treatment to the injury.
The Divisional Court denied leave to appeal, finding no conflicting decision or matter of general importance.
The court noted that the responding party's expert had previously opined that the geographic tongue injury stemmed from the pain following the dental work, creating a genuine issue for trial.
