Following through on plans first reported by Rolling Stone, a California judge ruled that the $12.9 million in damages awarded to a housekeeper attacked by a dog outside Chris Brown’s home was excessive and should be reduced by several million based on the evidence presented at trial. If the housekeeper rejects the reduced award, the judge said, Brown will be entitled to a new trial limited to damages.
According to documents obtained by Rolling Stone, Los Angeles County Judge Huey P. Cotton has given Avila the option to choose a a reduced $9.5 million damages award or retry her claims against Brown. “The court finds that the jury’s award to Maria Avila is excessive,” the judge’s order stated. “The court elects to issue a conditional order granting a new trial, as to Maria Avila only, on the issue of damages unless Plaintiff consents to a reduction of the jury’s damages to $9.5 million.”
Cotton kept a separate $855,000 award by the jury to Avila’s sister, Patricia Avila, who was working with Maria when the attack happened, intact. The amount was for past economic damages and emotional distress.
Avila’s lawyer, Nancy Doumanian, previously disputed the judge’s tentative finding that there was insufficient evidence Avila had suffered permanent nerve damage. Doumanian pointed to testimony from the surgeon who treated Avila on the night of the attack and continued caring for her through reconstructive procedures on her face and arm.
During the two-week trial last June, Avila took the witness stand and broke down crying as she recounted for jurors the Dec. 12, 2020, mauling at Brown’s home in the Tarzana neighborhood of the San Fernando Valley. Avila said the attack left her with severe injuries to her arm and face, extensive scarring, and post-traumatic stress disorder. In Tuesday’s decision, Cotton said Avila should be compensated for emotional distress and “persistent pain” from the attack, but that there was “insufficient evidence of extensive permanent nerve damage.”
Before trial, Brown admitted negligence under California’s dog-bite statute. He continued to dispute the extent of Avila’s injuries and claimed he had warned Avila and her sister — both Spanish speakers — not to go outside without asking him first because his dogs were not friendly. The women denied the conversation took place.
Cotton also rejected an argument by Brown’s lawyers that jurors were biased because Brown’s felony conviction for his 2009 domestic violence assault on his then-girlfriend, Rihanna, was mentioned. During the trial, jurors didn’t hear details of that incident, only that the conviction was on Brown’s record.
A lawyer for Avila did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A representative for Brown did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
