According to reporting from the ABA Journal, the case took a dramatic turn after Hausman’s former personal assistant came forward with information about missing emails and an undisclosed email account.

The Cruise Ship Door Accident: Timeline and Location:

The incident occurred in 2011 aboard a Holland America Line cruise ship identified in court records and news coverage as the ms Amsterdam. Hausman was on an around-the-world voyage, and the ship was approaching Honolulu, Hawaii, when the sliding door accident happened.

Hausman, then 61, walked through an automatic sliding glass door that led toward an outer deck area. The door allegedly closed too quickly and struck him in the temple or side of the face. He was bleeding, dazed, and later examined by onboard medical staff.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington state, where Holland America is headquartered and where its passenger ticket contracts often require cases to be filed. The trial later took place before a federal jury in Seattle.

This was not treated as a simple accident involving a door. The plaintiff argued that the company had notice of a mechanical hazard and failed to protect cruise ship passengers from a known risk.

The Passenger’s Injuries: From Sliding Glass Door to Brain Injury:

Hausman claimed the sliding glass door caused a traumatic brain injury. He said the head strike led to concussion symptoms that developed into long-term medical episodes, including seizures, vertigo, dizziness, fatigue, memory loss, and post-concussion syndrome.

The victim experienced seizures and memory loss after the accident. Hausman also claimed the injury made it harder to multitask, tolerate bright lights, function in busy public places, and stay awake normally. His wife, Carol Hausman, reportedly testified that he was not the same person after the incident.

The injuries also affected his business life. Hausman said he had to sell or significantly reduce his role in the gold center, his Springfield business, because of cognitive problems and physical limitations.

Medical experts linked the symptoms to the head trauma from the automatic sliding door. The plaintiff suffered a traumatic brain injury from an automatic door, and his lawyers argued that the long-term effects changed his daily life.

The Seattle Jury Verdict: How the Award Reached $21 Million:

After a nine-day trial in 2015, the jury found Holland America Line negligent for Hausman’s injuries. A jury awarded $21.5 million for a cruise ship injury, making the case widely reported by outlets including the Springfield State Journal-Register and other local sources often searched alongside phrases like illinois times.

The award was divided into two major parts:

A jury awarded $16.5 million in punitive damages. Jurors cited serious negligence for awarding punitive damages, based largely on evidence that Holland America had prior notice of similar door incidents.

Jurors heard testimony of 16 similar injuries from automatic doors. The case involved 16 similar prior injuries from automatic doors, and other evidence suggested a broader pattern across cruises operated by the cruise line.

Holland America argued that Hausman walked into the door himself and disputed responsibility. But the jury sided with the injured passenger after considering the testimony, expert opinions, and security camera footage.

Inside the Evidence: Surveillance Video, Door Settings, and Cruise Line Knowledge:

The verdict turned heavily on evidence about the door, the video, and what Holland America knew before Hausman was injured.

Security camera footage showed Hausman approaching or passing through the automatic sliding glass door when it closed and struck his head. Hausman’s lawyers used the video to argue that he did not simply walk into a stationary door.

Experts testified that automatic doors should not strike pedestrians according to experts. They also argued that the automatic sliding system, motion sensors, and hold-open timing were allegedly set in a way that allowed the door to close quickly.

Plaintiff attorneys argued that the doors may have been calibrated aggressively to reduce air conditioning loss and save money on air conditioning costs. In other words, the claim was that passenger safety was compromised in an attempt to control air conditioning and energy use inside the ship.

The Cochran Firm summary notes that jurors heard evidence of prior incidents and expert testimony about automatic sliding systems. Evidence showed over 30 prior injuries occurred due to the same doors, though the judge admitted 16 similar incidents at trial as relevant.

Holland America did not admit the door was defective. The company maintained that its systems were reasonable and placed blame on Hausman’s movements during the incident.

Why Punitive Damages Were Awarded:

Punitive damages are different from compensatory damages. They are not just meant to pay victims back for losses; they are meant to punish especially reckless conduct and deter similar behavior in the future.

In this case, the jury awarded $16.5 million in punitive damages against Holland America. The size of the award reflected the jury’s view that the cruise line’s conduct went beyond ordinary negligence.

The plaintiff’s argument was straightforward: Holland America knew automatic doors had struck people before, yet failed to make sufficient safety changes. Jurors heard testimony that automatic doors had injured passengers in prior incidents, and that door settings could have been modified to make impacts less likely.

Noteworthy cases raise awareness of passenger rights regarding corporate negligence. They also send a signal to cruise lines that mechanical hazards are not minor maintenance issues when they can trigger medical episodes, cause brain injury, or seriously change a passenger’s life.

Cruise lines are legally required to protect passengers from mechanical hazards. Following high-profile lawsuits, cruise lines may need to increase safety modifications and warnings following lawsuits, especially around automatic sliding doors, stairways, deck surfaces, and other areas where equipment can injure passengers.

How the $21 Million Verdict Was Thrown Out?

The case changed dramatically after the jury award. In January 2016, federal judge Barbara J. Rothstein vacated the verdict and ordered a new trial.

The issue was not the original door incident itself. It was evidence.

Hausman’s former personal assistant, Amy Mizeur, contacted Holland America’s lawyers and reported that Hausman had deleted emails and failed to disclose a personal email account. Some recovered emails appeared to contradict parts of his trial testimony about his limitations after the injury.

One example involved Hausman’s testimony about avoiding ladders because of vertigo. A recovered email described him using a fire ax from a 10-foot ladder to chop ice off his front porch. That detail became important because it suggested his daily activities may not have matched his courtroom claims.

The judge found that Hausman intentionally destroyed or failed to preserve relevant evidence during discovery. She also found his testimony evasive and inconsistent. However, Judge Rothstein expressly stated that she was not finding misconduct by Hausman’s lawyers.

Because the deleted evidence affected credibility and trial preparation, the judge concluded the verdict could not stand. Holland America obtained a new trial order, though the case was not dismissed with prejudice at that stage.