Skip to main content

$74,437 Jury Verdict for Farmington Head-On Collision Injury

$74,437 Jury Verdict for Farmington Head-On Collision Injury

SC

Sohini Chakraborty

Sohini Chakraborty is a lawyer, with over two years of experience in legal research and analysis. She specializes in working closely with expert witnesses, offering critical support in preparing legal research and detailed case studies.

3 min read
$74,437 Jury Verdict for Farmington Head-On Collision Injury

Case Background

The legal dispute originated from a motor vehicle collision that occurred on the afternoon of October 19, 2023, in Farmington, Connecticut. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Litchfield at Torrington with a return date of October 29, 2024. The Plaintiff, Victor Plummer, sought financial recovery for damages sustained during the accident.

Cause

The collision happened at approximately 1:34 p.m. on Plainville Avenue (Route 177). Victor Plummer drove his vehicle southbound near the intersection of Lake Garda Drive. At the same time, David Cruz operated a vehicle owned by Sheri Vontell in the opposite northerly direction.

The Plaintiff alleged that the vehicle driven by Cruz suddenly veered into the southbound lanes and collided with Plummer's car. The complaint charged Cruz with several acts of negligence:

  • Failure to keep a proper lookout.

  • Failure to apply brakes or swerve to avoid the crash.

  • Failure to keep the vehicle under proper control.

  • Operating the vehicle at an unreasonable speed.

  • Violating state laws regarding driving on the right-hand side of the road and staying within a single lane.

Injury

The force of the impact caused Victor Plummer to suffer multiple physical injuries, many of which he claimed might be permanent. His medical complications included:

  • Head contusion and persistent headaches.

  • Neck and chest pain.

  • Right shoulder and bilateral wrist pain.

  • Back pain, including lumbar stenosis and lumbar radiculopathy.

  • General physical and mental pain and suffering.

Additionally, the Plaintiff stated that these injuries forced him to spend large sums of money on hospital care, diagnostic tests, and therapy. He also remained unable to participate in his usual daily activities.

Damages Sought

Plummer claimed money damages exceeding $15,000, exclusive of interest and costs. He sought compensation for both his medical expenses and his non-economic losses, such as physical and mental suffering.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Plaintiff(s): Victor Plummer.

  • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Garrett M. Moore, Sr. of Moore, O'Brien & Foti.

Defendant(s): David Cruz | Sheri Vontell.

  • Counsel for Defendant(s): Michael Quinlan of Kropke & McManus.

Claims

The lawsuit consisted of two primary counts:

  1. Negligence: Directed at David Cruz for his operation of the vehicle.

  2. Vicarious Liability: Directed at Sheri Vontell. The Plaintiff argued that because Vontell owned the vehicle and Cruz operated it with her permission as her agent or employee, she was legally liable for the damages under Connecticut General Statutes.

Defense

In their formal answer filed on February 18, 2025, the Defendants admitted that the collision occurred and that Sheri Vontell owned the car. However, they stated they had insufficient knowledge regarding the specific allegations of negligence and the extent of Plummer's injuries, effectively leaving the Plaintiff to prove those facts in Court.

Jury Verdict

On February 18, 2026, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Victor Plummer and against both David Cruz and Sheri Vontell. The jury found that the negligence of David Cruz proximately caused the injuries and losses.

The total damages awarded were $74,437.30, broken down as follows:

  • Economic Damages (Past medical expenses): $13,837.30.

  • Non-Economic Damages: $60,600.00.

Court Documents

Complaint

Jury Verdict

About the Author

SC

Sohini Chakraborty

Sohini Chakraborty is a lawyer, with over two years of experience in legal research and analysis. She specializes in working closely with expert witnesses, offering critical support in preparing legal research and detailed case studies.