Gerrard Kaonga
A 56-year-old man was awarded a whopping sum of money after being hit by a sliding door four years prior on a cruise ship.
Jim Hausman was willing to take legal action against Holland American cruise company after an incident that happened on board back in 2011.
A video was able to catch the moment that Jim walked through a hallway when an automatic sliding door closed on him, hitting him hard in the side of the head.
While the hit looked harmless enough, Jim and his wife Carol revealed it was actually the beginning of a series of health issues.
Advert
After the incident on the cruise ship the pair continued to enjoy the cruise as normal hoping a few days of relaxation would be exactly what the doctor ordered.
However, even after the cruise ended the issues persisted... in fact, they got worse.
Speaking to Inside Edition back in 2015, Carol said: “The doctor originally thought it was a bump on the head, there was a laceration and that he would recover.
“He is not logical anymore, irritability, mood swings and eventually he developed having seizures as well.”
Following the lawsuit a federal jury initially awarded Hausman $21.5 million in Washington state.
However, in early 2016, Judge Barbara Rothstein tossed the verdict for Hausman and ordered a new trial.
The cause was that Hausman’s former personal assistant, Amy Mizeur, contacted Holland America to let them know he had deleted emails that could have hurt his case.
She said she had seen Hausman spend several days deleting emails that he should have turned over to Holland America’s lawyers before the jury trial and during discovery.
It was also claimed that Hausman chose not to disclose the existence of one of his email accounts.
At the time, the judge said: “As a witness, [Hausman] came across evasive and untrustworthy.
“He appeared to weigh each answer, not for its truthfulness, but to assess whether it would damage his case. Mr. Hausman also seemed to capitalize on his alleged brain injury when it was convenient for him.
"He was confused or claimed memory loss when confronted with a question or exhibit that appeared to undermine his claims, yet was animated and full of information when his testimony supported his case.”
It is not clear if a retrial date has already taken place.