Desther v. Romanovsky: $489K Verdict in Darien Rear-End Case
Table of Contents
Case Background
The legal dispute began following a motor vehicle collision that occurred on November 21, 2022, in Darien, Connecticut. At approximately 12:10 p.m., Extra Desther drove his vehicle westbound on Ledge Road. At the same time, John Romanovsky operated a vehicle owned by Hood Services 24 LLC, traveling directly behind Desther.
Cause
The collision occurred when Romanovsky’s vehicle suddenly struck the rear of Desther’s vehicle without warning. Desther alleged that Romanovsky failed to maintain a proper lookout, neglected to apply his brakes in time, and followed too closely for the road conditions. The Plaintiff further claimed that Romanovsky traveled at an unreasonable speed and failed to swerve or sound his horn to avoid the impact.
Injury
As a result of the impact, Extra Desther sustained a variety of physical injuries, some of which he claimed were permanent. These included neck and back pain, headaches, and cervical and lumbar radiculopathy. He also reported a sprain in his right hand along with persistent finger pain. The complaint noted that the crash aggravated a pre-existing spinal condition and caused significant physical and mental suffering.
Damages Sought
Desther sought monetary damages to compensate for his losses. In his initial filing, he stated the demand exceeded $15,000, covering both the medical expenses he had already incurred and the costs of future medical care. He also claimed damages for his inability to enjoy his usual daily activities.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The case proceeded through the Superior Court, J.D. of Fairfield at Bridgeport under docket number FBT-CV23-6127613-S. Throughout the litigation, the parties debated the extent of the Defendants' liability and the true value of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Extra Desther
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Christopher J. Flood of The Flood Law Firm, LLC
· Experts for Plaintiff(s): Patrick Mastroianni | Erik Heyliger | Andrew Illig
Defendant(s): John Romanovsky and Hood Services 24 LLC
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Dennis M. Laccavole of Goldstein and Peck, P.C.
· Experts for Defendant(s): Dennis Michael Ogiela
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Desther's counsel argued that the accident was the direct result of Romanovsky’s negligence. They emphasized that Hood Services 24 LLC was also responsible because Romanovsky was operating their vehicle with permission and acting as their agent or employee at the time of the crash. The Plaintiff maintained that the injuries required past and future medical care.
Defense
The Defendants filed an answer on June 20, 2024, in which they admitted that the collision occurred but denied allegations of negligence. While they acknowledged that Romanovsky was driving a vehicle owned by Hood Services 24 LLC and was acting as their agent, they challenged the claim that Desther had suffered the specific injuries or financial losses described in the complaint. They insisted that the Plaintiff provide proof for the medical expenses and claims of physical impairment.
Jury Verdict
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff, Extra Desther, and against the Defendants, John Romanovsky et al on 21st November 2025. The jury determined that the Defendants’ conduct caused the Plaintiff’s injuries and resulting losses. It then proceeded to assess damages based on the evidence presented at trial.
For past economic damages, the jury reviewed medical bills from multiple providers and awarded compensation only for charges it found reasonable and necessary. The jury awarded $1,602.30 to EMP of New Haven County, LLC and $21,854.59 to Stamford Hospital. It awarded $8,345.00 for treatment at CARE Health & Wellness Center. The jury awarded $2,410.00 to Advanced Radiology Associates and $1,352.00 for services provided by Andrew J. Illig, D.O. The jury declined to award any damages for the charges submitted by Patrick Mastroianni, M.D. Based on these findings, the jury awarded total past economic damages of $35,563.89.
The jury also concluded that the Plaintiff would require future medical care and incur additional expenses related to the injuries. It awarded $133,107.00 in future economic damages to compensate for those anticipated costs.
In addition, the jury found that the Plaintiff suffered significant noneconomic harm as a result of the Defendants’ conduct. It awarded $320,288.00 for pain, suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.
After adding past economic damages, future economic damages, and noneconomic damages, the jury returned a total verdict of $488,958.99 in favor of the Plaintiff.