The appellant mother appealed a summary judgment order making her daughter a Crown ward without access.
She argued the motion judge erred in denying her an adjournment to retain new counsel and present additional evidence, and in granting the order on the record before him.
The Divisional Court admitted fresh evidence regarding a new parenting assessment but found it did not raise a genuine issue requiring a trial.
The court concluded the motion judge made no errors in denying the adjournment or in finding that Crown wardship without access was in the child's best interests.
The appeal was dismissed.
