Dr. Wayne Carman

The plaintiff developed a lesion on her foot and was referred by her family doctor to a dermatologist, who then referred her to a plastic surgeon.

The lesion was eventually excised and diagnosed as a malignant melanoma, resulting in severe health consequences.

The plaintiff sued both specialists for medical negligence.

The Superior Court of Justice found both defendants liable.

The dermatologist breached the standard of care by failing to adequately communicate his findings and the urgency of the situation in his referral note.

The plastic surgeon breached the standard of care by failing to urgently excise the lesion despite observing signs of a possible melanoma.

The court concluded that their combined negligence materially contributed to the delayed diagnosis and the plaintiff's resulting damages.

The plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against the defendants relating to cosmetic facial surgery.

The defendants moved for summary judgment to dismiss the action.

The plaintiff alleged breaches of the standard of care, lack of informed consent, battery, fraud, and vicarious liability.

The court found that the plaintiff failed to tender any admissible expert evidence to support her claims, while the defendants provided uncontradicted expert evidence that the standard of care was met and the procedures were appropriate.

The court applied the 'full appreciation test' under Rule 20 and concluded there was no genuine issue requiring a trial.

The defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted and the action was dismissed.