Judge Declares Mistrial in Chris Brown Dog-Mauling Trial After Juror Misconduct

Chris Brown’s civil trial over allegations that a security dog at his Los Angeles home severely mauled a former housekeeper was abruptly halted Tuesday after a judge declared a mistrial over juror misconduct.

The singer was expected to take the stand as the first witness when Judge Huey P. Cotton informed both sides that one juror had violated court instructions by conducting independent online research and sharing that information with other members of the panel.

“Unfortunately, one of the jurors has violated my admonitions against searching the internet for information, and not only that, but he also shared it,” the judge said from the bench before dismissing the jury. “As a consequence, I have to declare a mistrial.”

After the mistrial ruling, the judge instructed attorneys to remain in court while a new jury selection process began using a separate pool of prospective jurors that had already been assembled.

Brown then requested a brief delay in proceedings. His attorney said the singer had planned to leave Los Angeles that evening to visit his newborn son in Las Vegas. Judge Cotton ordered Brown to return to court on Thursday morning.

The lawsuit stems from a Dec. 12, 2020, incident at Brown’s residence in the San Fernando Valley. Maria Avila, a former housekeeper employed at the property, alleges she suffered severe injuries when a large security dog named Hades attacked her as she stepped outside to take out the trash.

Brown had denied responsibility for the incident. During jury selection this week, however, attorneys said the singer and his company now acknowledge some liability. Brown’s legal team said the trial is no longer focused on whether Avila was harmed, but on how much compensation may be owed and whether additional claims by members of her family should also be recognized.

Avila’s lawsuit alleges the dog suddenly appeared and began biting her face, arm, and other parts of her body while she screamed for help. The animal caused severe injuries that required emergency medical treatment and surgery, according to court documents. Avila claims she continues to suffer permanent facial disfigurement, nerve damage, and vision loss from the attack.

In a previously recorded deposition, Avila described the attack as sudden and overwhelming.

“It attacked me on my face, my hand, and it pierced its teeth on my foot,” she testified. “I didn’t see it, I simply felt it, it was something really big.”

The filing also alleges that Brown came outside while Avila was lying injured in the driveway and failed to immediately assist her. Avila claims the singer stood nearby while talking on his phone before leaving the area. She further disputes allegations that she had been instructed not to go outside without permission.

Patricia Avila, Maria’s sister, is also seeking damages. She alleges she rushed outside after hearing the commotion and found her sister severely injured and covered in blood. Patricia Avila claims the scene left lasting emotional trauma because she believed her sister might die before help arrived.

Brown has offered a sharply different account of the events. During his own pretrial deposition, the singer testified that he was upstairs inside the home when he heard Hades growling. He said the unusual noise prompted him to investigate.

According to Brown, he found Avila lying face down in the driveway when he arrived outside. He said he checked to make sure she was breathing before securing the dogs and directing security personnel to help. Brown also testified that he did not see blood at the scene and left only after being told emergency responders were on their way.

The dog’s fate became another point of dispute during the litigation. Brown said he had no involvement in decisions made after the attack regarding the animal’s removal from the property. Court records indicate the Caucasian Shepherd, also known as a Central Asian Ovcharka, was eventually transported to Northern California, abandoned, later recovered by authorities, and euthanized.

The trial has also drawn attention because of Brown’s prior legal history. Before proceedings began, the judge granted a request from Brown’s legal team barring references to his 2009 felony assault case involving his former girlfriend Rihanna. During jury selection, several prospective jurors acknowledged they were aware of that history and felt unable to remain impartial. The judge dismissed those individuals, ruling that Brown’s prior criminal case was unrelated to the issues being decided in the dog-mauling lawsuit.

The trial is expected to restart on Thursday after a new jury is seated, with Brown still expected to testify when proceedings resume.