Judge Dismisses Prisha Mosley's Fraud and Malpractice Claims Against Medical Providers

In a significant legal development, a Gaston County judge has dismissed all fraud and medical malpractice claims filed by Prisha Mosley against the medical professionals involved in her gender transition procedures.

 

Judge Robert C. Ervin, presiding over the Civil Superior Court, concluded that there were no genuine issues of material fact, granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissing Mosley's claims "with prejudice," thereby preventing any future refiling.

 

Mosley, who began her gender transition at 16, initiated legal action in 2023, alleging fraud, negligence, and malpractice against her healthcare providers. Her malpractice claims were initially dismissed due to North Carolina's four-year statute of limitations on such lawsuits.

 

In July 2025, the state legislature passed House Bill 805, extending the statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims related to gender transition procedures to 10 years. This legislative change was seen as a potential avenue for Mosley to revive her case.

 

Despite the new law, the court ruled that Mosley's claims remain time-barred. The defendants named in her lawsuit included Piedmont Plastic Surgery and Dermatology, P.A.; Family Solutions, PLLC; Tree of Life Counseling, PLLC; and The Moses Cone Memorial Hospital Operating Corporation (Cone Health).

 

The decision has drawn criticism from advocacy groups. Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the NC Values Coalition, stated, "People like Prisha deserve the ability to hold the doctors who committed medical malpractice against them accountable. Judge Ervin was wrong to deny her motion."

 

Mosley's legal team plans to appeal the ruling. Mary Summa, general counsel for the NC Values Coalition, commented, "The research is clear that the judge's ruling should be reversed on appeal. There are issues of material facts, and they need to be addressed to bring justice for Prisha."

 

If the appeal is successful, it could set a precedent for similar cases, potentially reshaping accountability in medical malpractice claims related to gender transition procedures.