Chris Brown‘s ex-housekeeper has sued him for an alleged dog attack that happened while she and her sister were cleaning his home — but the singer isn’t taking the allegation resting, and desires his accuser to send to a battery of psychological tests.
Court files obtained by Radar Online reveal that the “Run It” vocalist made the demand through his legal representatives on Monday (July 17). According to the files, Patricia Avila — who, together with her sibling Maria, was worked with by Brown to clean his Tarzana (near Los Angeles) home at the rate of $600/day — declared to be struggling with “extreme emotional distress” after seeing her sibling presumably get assaulted by among Brown’s dogs.
Brown, nevertheless, is calling shenanigans on Avila’s claim, and desires her to send to an 8-hour psychological test to show her claims.
It should be explained, at this moment, that there are 2 exceptional claims versus Chris Brown: one submitted by Maria Avila, where she demands more than $71 million in damages, and one submitted by Patricia Avila, where she demands an undefined quantity in damages. While Maria Avila’s case is focused around the real injury sustained, Patricia Avila’s case is concentrated on the resultant “pain and suffering” of the attack.
Last week, Brown’s legal group asked the Los Angeles Superior Court to push back the trial date for the pending dog bite suit back from September 2023 to December 2023. Brown’s legal group argued that the house cleaner who brought the fit versus him “would not be harmed” by the date being pressed back.
What’s more, Brown’s group argued that the house cleaner who was bitten is still being dealt with for her injuries under her employee’s payment claims, which implies the group is not able to collect crucial proof required for them to continue with the trial.
The judge commanding the case approved the movement.
Patricia Avila claimed that one of Brown’s two dogs attacked her sister, Maria, while the set were tending to the vocalist’s house back in 2020.
Chris Brown Blasts ‘Fake Agenda Driving’ Artists In Rant About His ‘Purpose’
The dog in concern — a Caucasian ovcharka — presumably grumbled at Maria and “proceeded to viciously attack” her when she entered into the yard to clear the vacuum.
Patricia presumably ran outdoors “where she found her sister covered in blood while she was screaming and crying for help.” Brown then personally made the call to 911, with Patricia stating Maria was entrusted to injuries around her eye, bites on her leg and inches of skin missing out on from her arm. The injuries led her to spending numerous days in healthcare facility, needing 2 surgical treatments.
While Chris Brown is declaring that the dog assaulted the housemaids after the set “provoked” him, California is what’s referred to as a “strict liability” state. According to Forbes, this implies that the dog owner is accountable for all dog bites, as long as the bites occur either on public property (such as a park) or on personal property where the victim was licensed to be there. Trespassers or other unapproved visitors to personal property are not covered by the rigorous liability guideline.
It’s worth keeping in mind, nevertheless, that a legitimate defense versus the rigorous liability guideline is if “the victim provoked the dog and was fully or partly responsible for the incident,” which Chris Brown is declaring as a defense.
