Filed Date: Dec. 12, 2024
Closed Date: 2025
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case tested whether states can reach across their borders to penalize out-of-state physicians for prescribing abortion medication to their residents.
The Texas Attorney General brought this lawsuit against a New York-based doctor who allegedly prescribed and mailed abortion-inducing medication to a Texas patient via telehealth. On December 12, 2024, the State of Texas filed a complaint against the doctor in the District Court of Collin County, Texas. The State brought the action under the Texas Health and Safety Code and Texas Occupations Code, alleging that the defendant had practiced medicine in Texas without a Texas medical license and illegally performed an abortion in violation of Texas' total abortion ban, Tex. Health & Safety Code § 170A.002. Represented by the Office of the Texas Attorney General, the State alleged that the defendant prescribed and mailed mifepristone and misoprostol to a 20-year-old Collin County woman in approximately May 2024 without examining her in person, and that the woman subsequently suffered hemorrhaging and required hospital care. The State sought a temporary restraining order, a permanent injunction barring Carpenter from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents, civil penalties of at least $100,000 per violation under Tex. Health & Safety Code § 170A.005, and attorneys' fees and costs. The case was assigned to District Judge Bryan Gantt.
The defendant, who held a New York medical license and was the co-founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine as well as the chief executive officer of Possible Health Medical, P.C. and an officer of Jane Medical, PLLC, did not respond to the complaint or appear in the proceedings. She appeared pro se on the docket.
On January 23, 2025, the State moved for a default judgment after the defendant failed to appear. On February 13, 2025, Judge Gantt granted the State's motion for default judgment and entered a final judgment and permanent injunction against the defendant, enjoining her from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents and imposing $100,000 in civil penalties as sought by the Attorney General.
As of April 2026, the case appears to be closed following the entry of the permanent injunction and default judgment.
The Attorney General subsequently attempted to file the default judgment in the county where the defendant's medical practice was located. Citing the New York shield law, the county clerk twice refused the filing. The clerk was subsequently sued by the Texas Attorney General and won. See Texas v. Bruck.
Summary Authors
Josie Clerfond (4/22/2026)
Texas v. Bruck, New York state trial court (2025)
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Healthcare Access and Reproductive Issues
Key Dates
Filing Date: Dec. 12, 2024
Closing Date: 2025
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
The Texas Attorney General brought suit on behalf of the state of Texas.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Other Dockets:
Texas state trial court 471-08943-2024
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Amount Defendant Pays: $100,000
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Basis:
Medical/Mental Health Care:
Reproductive rights:
Reproductive health care (including birth control, abortion, and others)
Case Summary of Texas v. Carpenter, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/47724/ (last updated 4/22/2026).