Chris Brown Uses Ex-Housekeeper’s Words Against Her

Chris Brown is not backing down as his legal brawl with his ex-housekeeper intensifies!

The “Bruce Lee” singer is tackling his disgruntled former employee, Maria Avila, with facts from her previous accounts of events to law enforcement and first responders when the dog attack reportedly happened in 2020.

Chris Brown and his former staff are headlocked in a $90 million court battle that began in 2021 and has gone through several phases, with the latest being a request for more information about the singer’s finances.

Brown has now submitted significant evidence in his defense against a $90 million lawsuit filed by his former housekeeper. In the latest filing, Brown’s legal team countered Avila’s assertions that he did nothing to assist her after the incident.

They referenced statements she made to Animal Control Officer Angela Hooks shortly after the event, contradicting her current claims.

According to the City of Los Angeles Department of Animal Services Investigation Report, Avila stated there were no witnesses present, yet Brown and a security guard responded to her screams.

Brown’s lawyer highlighted that he called for paramedics and secured the dog, Hades, potentially putting himself at risk during the situation.

This filing challenges Avila’s portrayal of Brown’s actions, emphasizing that he acted swiftly to help. Brown also maintained that he had no prior knowledge of Hades being a threat.

In Touch confirmed that he cited a member of his security team who reported that the dog had never shown aggression and was typically playful and gentle.

ABrown’s security team member, identified as Emil Lewis, has now claimed ownership of the rogue dog, Hades. He repeatedly warned Avila and her sister not to leave the house unattended.

He explained that the dogs on the property were unfamiliar with the women, which could lead to unpredictable situations. Brown’s lawyer reinforced this point, highlighting that the security team had explicitly instructed Avila and her sister to remain indoors when unsupervised.

The lawyer criticized Avila for disregarding these instructions, suggesting that her actions led to the unfortunate incident. 

Furthermore, he characterized Avila’s motion as filled with exaggerations and unfounded accusations. They argued that she was attempting to fabricate a claim for punitive damages against Brown.

Ultimately, the lawyer insisted that her strategy was misguided, as even if her claims were true, they did not meet the legal standards for malice or other factors necessary to support a valid claim for punitive damages.

On Tuesday, The Blast shared that the performer approached the court to protect his privacy amid a court case. He was reportedly worried that the public disclosure of his home address could lead to harassment.

The R&B singer filed a motion to keep his residence confidential after sharing personal details with his former housekeeper’s attorney during a deposition.

In her lawsuit claims, Avila alleged that the dog mauled her face and arms, prompting her to seek damages for the injuries, which have left her disfigured.

On May 2, Brown submitted an emergency motion for a protective order to prevent the release of sensitive information disclosed during the deposition, which took place on April 30.

His legal team highlighted that confidential details, including his home address and mother’s name, were revealed, but the opposing party’s attorney opposed the request for a protective order.

The manner in which Avila’s legal team handled the sensitive matter with the singer’s attorney led to concerns about the confidentiality of testimony provided during the deposition.

The singer’s lawyer reportedly advised him to refrain from answering sensitive questions during the deposition, particularly those related to his Social Security number.

This problem is heightened by the singer’s previous experiences with home intrusions that have raised safety concerns for him and his family. His attorney referenced a notable incident where a stranger lived in his home while he was away on tour.

These break-ins are described as an “unwarranted annoyance” and pose serious risks to the artist and his loved ones. Furthermore, there is apprehension that if details from the deposition are made public, it could invite unnecessary scrutiny and mockery.

Before the deposition took place, Avila accused the singer, Brown, and his legal team of intentionally delaying the process. Avila claimed that Brown’s dog had permanently disfigured her face and argued that she had been trying to schedule the deposition for several months.

She stated that Brown’s new legal team informed her that he no longer resides in California, which hindered his ability to attend the deposition in person, and that his former lawyers hadn’t communicated this relocation to her.

As a result, the former employee sought the court’s intervention to compel Brown’s attendance, filing a request for $7,560 in sanctions due to the delays. 

However, Brown’s legal representatives countered her request by highlighting that they had only started representing him in August 2024 and were actively working to arrange his deposition. 

They also denied accusations that he had intentionally missed earlier depositions without informing Avila’s lawyers. His defense team noted that Brown’s busy schedule as a touring musician limited his availability, especially during the Fall and Winter of 2024 and early 2025.

Chris Brown and Maria Avila’s case continues to take interesting twists and turns!