A North Carolina appeals panel spent an hour Tuesday grilling lawyers over whether Prisha Mosley, a woman from the Charlotte area who once identified as transgender, deserves a jury trial against the doctors and counselors she says pushed her into a medical transition as a teenager. The case, Mosley v. Emerson, centers on hormone therapy and a double mastectomy Mosley underwent at 18, and it has become a closely watched test of a new North Carolina law extending how long detransitioners have to sue.
According to Carolina Journal, Mosley sued multiple defendants for medical malpractice, fraud and conspiracy, and her attorneys say she was told that testosterone and the removal of her healthy breasts were necessary, life-saving treatments. Mosley filed the underlying lawsuit in Gaston County in July 2023, according to The Center Square. Her initial malpractice and fraud case was thrown out before trial, and the North Carolina Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on the appeal Tuesday, per WRAL.
A Teenager's Path Through Transition and Back
WRAL reports that Mosley experienced anorexia and other mental illnesses as a teenager before she began identifying as transgender and transitioning from female to male. She started hormone therapy and later underwent the breast-removal procedure at 18, the station's report states. Mosley eventually resumed identifying as a woman, and she now works for the NC Values Coalition, a conservative Christian political advocacy group, where she advocates against procedures to transition people's genders, per the same account.
Mosley has said she does not believe breast removal or testosterone made her a man, according to WRAL. She alleges her doctors failed to stop her from undergoing the breast-removal procedure, and her lawyers say she did not receive proper informed consent or aftercare, according to Carolina Journal. Her attorneys, Trey Shelton and Anthony Biller — the latter connected to the NC Values Coalition — argue she deserves a jury decision on whether she was wronged, the outlet notes.
Statute of Repose Takes Center Stage
The legal fight largely turns on timing. Defense attorney David Hawisher told the panel that a revival statute cannot constitutionally revive claims that have already been extinguished by repose, arguing Mosley's claims are barred by North Carolina's four-year statute of repose for medical malpractice, according to Carolina Journal. A 2025 North Carolina law, according to the state legislature's enacted text, extended the window for certain claims tied to harm from gender-transition procedures, allowing such actions to be commenced within 10 years — but the trial court had already declined to revive Mosley's malpractice claim and granted summary judgment to defendants on other counts.
Shelton pushed back, telling the court, “But it's time for these defendants to face a jury,” per Carolina Journal's account of the hearing. He also urged the panel to use the case to make a statement about acceptable conduct, according to WRAL. Lawyers representing the opposing side countered that Mosley lacks standing to sue at all, the station reports.
Judges Press Both Sides on the Merits
The three-judge panel included two Republicans and one Democrat, according to WRAL. Judge Jefferson Griffin, a Republican on the panel, asked whether telling a girl she can grow a penis constitutes practicing medicine, the station reports, while fellow Republican Judge Chris Freeman indicated the case's arguments are suitable for a jury to hear.
Matt Sawchak, who represents a therapist being sued in the case, argued that medical professionals should be protected when acting on patients' wishes, per WRAL's reporting. He said punishing medical professionals when patients later regret treatment does not fit North Carolina's existing malpractice laws, and that strategies for helping patients in the emerging area of mental health and gender identity require clinical judgment and intellectual skill. The station also notes that the North Carolina legislature has updated medical malpractice laws regularly over the past 50 years while protecting medical professionals' ability to give opinions and advice to patients.
Supporters on Both Sides Fill the Courtroom
Mosley's parents attended Tuesday's hearing in support of their daughter, as did NC Values Coalition leadership, according to WRAL. The 2023 North Carolina law banning gender-affirming medical care for minors under 18, which the NC Values Coalition helped push for, forms part of the broader backdrop to the case, the station notes.
Kori Hennessy, executive director of the LGBT Center of Raleigh, told WRAL that gender-affirming care is highly effective, safe and positively changes the lives of many transgender people, while also saying that people who detransition deserve care and support. The station cites Human Rights Campaign figures putting the transgender population at about 1% of the population, and notes that transgender people who transition are typically happy with that choice. It also references a 2022 study, attributed to a Harvard Medical School professor, finding that between 1% and 14% of transgender patients later detransitioned, with rates differing between men and women and across stages of transition. Separately, a systematic review published in a medical journal and hosted in the National Institutes of Health's PubMed Central archive examined the prevalence of regret after gender-affirmation surgery and its potential physical and mental toll.
National Precedent and a $2 Million Verdict Loom Large
Biller said other state legislatures have looked to North Carolina's law and may be watching how the case proceeds in court, according to WRAL. Mosley's legal team has separately described the case as the first major test of the new law, one that could set a national precedent, per Carolina Journal.
The Center Square points to a comparable case decided in January, when a jury awarded Fox Varian $2 million in a lawsuit against medical providers over a double mastectomy performed when Varian was 16. That jury found the standard of care was violated because providers did not obtain informed consent and skipped psychological evaluations, according to the outlet. WRAL reports that a ruling in Mosley's favor could carry far-reaching implications for doctors, therapists and other healthcare professionals across North Carolina, potentially opening the door to more lawsuits against healthcare providers.
The Court of Appeals had not issued a ruling immediately after Tuesday's arguments, according to WRAL's report.
