Gabriella Kertesz, Appellant V. Bob Ferguson, Respondent

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
GABRIELLA KERTÉSZ, an individual,
Appellant,
v.
BOB FERGUSON, Attorney General of
the State of Washington,
Respondent.
No. 85872-6-I
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
MANN , J. — Gabriella Kertész sued the Washington Attorney General Bob
Ferguson, alleging he failed to enforce a statute related to actions for injuries resulting
from health care. Kertész appeals the denial of three orders: (1) her motion for
summary judgment, (2) her petition for injunctive and declaratory relief, and (3) her
motion to strike affirmative defense. Because the trial court granted Kertész’s motion to
dismiss her complaint with prejudice and without costs under CR 41(a)(1)(A), we
dismiss her appeal.
I
On May 24, 2023, Kertész sued Ferguson alleging failure to enforce RCW
7.70.060 which provides for consent form contents related to actions for injuries
resulting from health care. Kertész sought declaratory relief and an order directing
Ferguson to enforce RCW 7.70.060. On May 25, 2023, Kertész moved for summary
judgment. Kertész also moved to strike the defense of sovereign immunity and for an
order shortening time.

No. 85872-6-I/2
-2-
The trial court denied the petition for declaratory judgment, denied the motion for
summary judgment, and denied the motion to strike Ferguson’s affirmative defense.
On September 11, 2023, Kertész asked the court “to grant an order of Dismissal
with prejudice and without costs at the earliest opportunity.” Based on the parties’
stipulation, on September 25, 2023, the trial court granted Kertész’s motion and
dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs.
Kertész appeals.
II
Ferguson asks that we dismiss Kertész’s appeal because the underlying matter
was dismissed with prejudice. We agree.
Kertész sought and obtained a stipulated dismissal of her case with prejudice
and without costs. A voluntary dismissal with prejudice functions as a final judgment in
favor of the defendant. Elliott Bay Adjustment Co., Inc., v. Dacumos, 200 Wn. App. 208,
213, 401 P.3d 473 (2017). Because the case was dismissed, Kertész cannot revive
claims that she voluntarily gave up by appealing the ruling that the trial court entered
prior to the dismissal with prejudice.
We dismiss the appeal.
WE CONCUR: