Chris Brown is formally seeking a new trial and an overturned verdict after a Los Angeles jury ordered him to pay nearly $13 million in damages for a vicious 2020 dog attack at his Tarzana home. Meanwhile, his former housekeeper is asking the court to freeze tour assets and seize his current concert proceeds to satisfy the unpaid judgment.
The legal battle over a multimillion-dollar dog-bite judgment against Chris Brown has escalated into a dual offensive. The singer is moving to wipe out the verdict entirely, while his former housekeeper is asking a Los Angeles court to redirect his concert earnings to ensure she finally gets paid.
Los Angeles Court Filing Targets Verdict and Seeks New Trial
Chris Brown officially filed a notice in Los Angeles asking to toss out the verdict and secure a new trial, according to documents obtained by TMZ. The singer and his company, Black Pyramid LLC, submitted the filing following a judgment entered on July 16.
The underlying litigation stems from a December 12, 2020, incident at Brown’s Tarzana, California, home. Maria Avila, working as his housekeeper, was emptying the trash when she was viciously mauled by a 200-pound Caucasian shepherd named Hades. A Los Angeles jury subsequently decided the singer was liable for the attack.
Avila suffered severe damage to her arm and face, requiring dozens of sutures and skin grafts. Court filings note that she sustained nerve damage and permanent facial scarring, along with vision loss and lasting emotional trauma, which left her unable to work.
Arguments Raised in the Defense Bid to Invalidate the Judgment
In the new legal filing, Brown’s defense team outlines multiple grounds for setting aside the verdict. They argue that irregularities in the proceedings prevented a fair trial, allege jury misconduct, claim an excessive amount of damages was awarded, and assert there are insufficient new findings to prove liability.
During the trial, Brown acknowledged partial responsibility for negligence while disputing the severity of Avila’s injuries and arguing she shared blame for the incident. He testified that he had warned Avila the dogs on the property were “absolutely not” friendly and claimed the animal belonged to members of his security team rather than to him personally.
A hearing on the notice of intention to move for a new trial is set for September 22. The date falls squarely between concert stops in Las Vegas and Los Angeles on his active nationwide tour.
Housekeeper Seeks Concert Profits to Cover Unpaid $13 Million Award
While Brown fights to overturn the outcome, Avila’s legal team is moving aggressively to collect. Attorneys say that the singer and his company have made no effort to satisfy any portion of the judgment.
Avila’s attorney, Nancy Doumanian, stated in court filings that repeated attempts to discuss payment with Brown’s legal representatives have gone unanswered. Because those communications stalled, Avila is asking a judge to freeze tour-related accounts and redirect revenue generated by the singer’s current concert income to satisfy the unpaid $12.9 million award.
“At the same time, Defendant Christopher Brown is presently engaged in an active nationwide R&B concert tour that is generating substantial revenue.”
Nancy Doumanian, Attorney for Maria Avila, via aol.com
Brown and Usher launched the R&B Tour, short for Raymond & Brown, on June 26 with stadium dates across North America. Avila’s motion requests that if tour proceeds prove insufficient to clear the debt, the court should also examine music royalties, licensing revenue, merchandise sales, and sponsorship earnings.
Family Damages and the Shift Toward Judgment Enforcement
The jury’s decision extended beyond Avila’s primary award, resulting in additional financial allocations for her family members. Her sister received $885,000 for emotional distress, while her husband was awarded $50,000.
Legal experts observe that massive verdicts in animal attack cases are typically driven by the permanence of physical and psychological trauma. Bobby Taghavi, Managing Partner at law firm Sweet James, noted that celebrity status does not alter the underlying legal obligations regarding property safety and foreseeable risks.
“If payment still isn’t made voluntarily, the plaintiff can pursue post-judgment collection remedies, including identifying assets and seeking to garnish income where permitted by law. At that point, the legal battle shifts from proving liability to enforcing the judgment.”
Bobby Taghavi, Managing Partner at Sweet James, via aol.com
The court has not yet ruled on Avila’s motion to target tour proceeds. With the new trial motion scheduled for late September and post-trial enforcement efforts actively underway, the legal dispute between Brown and his former housekeeper remains unresolved.
Keep reading