A California judge has granted R&B singer Chris Brown another win in a lawsuit that has the potential to wipe out his estimated $50 million fortune, RadarOnline reported on March 28. The lawsuit, initiated by a woman going by Jane Doe in the initial court documents, Maria Avila, revolves around a harrowing incident at Brown’s Tarzana residence in December 2020. She was with her sister Patricia Avila, who is also suing Brown.
Despite her filing her legal claim under Jane Doe, Brown had fervently contended that Avila shouldn’t maintain anonymity in the case, emphasizing that pseudonyms should be reserved for “exceptional circumstances,” and this case does not have any.
Radar does not report when the judge ordered her identity be revealed. There is also no update when the case, which has been delayed several times, will actually go to court.
“The complaint contains no allegations that, other than the one-off dog bite to Jane Doe only, Plaintiffs have had any other negative or unpleasant interactions with Defendants. Plaintiffs don’t accuse Defendants of any personal threats or violence against them; at worst, defendants accidentally allowed a guard dog to bite Jane Doe when she left the house to empty the trash,” Brown’s motion reads, according to Radar.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Lisa R. Jaskol concurred, instructing Avila to disclose her true identity within 10 days and stipulating that subsequent legal documents must bear her name.
The Judge Has Previously Sided With Brown
Before this recent victory for Brown, the Los Angeles Superior Court judge issued him another small win.
In July 2023, the judge granted a delay in the trial. Originally slated for Sept. 26, 2023, the trial has now been rescheduled to December 2023. Brown’s defense successfully argued for the extension.
Adding another layer to the saga, the same judge also ruled in Brown’s favor in a parallel lawsuit brought forth by Patricia Avila, sister to the primary plaintiff, Maria.
Patricia claims emotional distress from witnessing her sister’s brutal mauling by Brown’s dog, Hades. Brown vehemently disputes Patricia’s account, contending she wasn’t in close proximity during the alleged attack.
Last summer, Brown had petitioned the court to compel Patricia to undergo an examination to substantiate her claims of trauma.
The judge has permitted an exhaustive eight-hour mental evaluation of one of Brown’s accusers. The assessment, to be conducted by experts of Brown’s choosing, aimed to either affirm or challenge the mental anguish she purports to have suffered following the incident involving Hades.
