Chris Brown's Ex-Housekeeper Ordered to Reveal Her Identity in $70 Million Battle Over Vicious Dog Attack
Brown accuses his ex-housekeeper of provoking the attack.
March 28 2024, Published 5:30 a.m. ET
A judge ruled Chris Brown's former housekeeper will have to reveal her identity before the upcoming trial over a dog attack that went down at the singer's Los Angeles mansion.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, the judge gave the woman 10 days to file an amended complaint with her true name and said all future pleadings must include her name.
Brown denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
As we first reported, the housekeeper sued Brown in 2021 using the pseudonym Jane Doe.
In court documents, Doe said the incident occurred while working at Brown's home on December 12, 2020. While taking out the trash, the housekeeper was attacked by a Caucasian Orvchake/Caucasian Shepherd dog named Hades attacked her.
A photo of Hades posted by Brown.
WARNING: The injury photos are posted below and are graphic.
Doe said the animal ripped off large chunks of her face, arms, and legs. She said she feared she was going to die while lying on the floor covered in blood.
In the complaint, Doe detailed how Brown came outside and allegedly instructed his team to remove the dog from the property.
Brown is fighting back in court.
“That group took the dog and dumped him in a pound in Humboldt County where he was euthanized a few days later. The dog’s chip connected the dog’s ownership to the defendant Chris Brown,” Doe claimed in court documents.
An ambulance arrived at Brown's home and transported Doe to a local hospital where she received treatment.
Since the incident, Doe said she incurred massive medical bills and had to deal with severe emotional distress due to the incident.
In a recent filing, Doe revealed she believes Brown should pay $71 million in damages.
One of the injury photos submitted by Doe.
Brown denied all allegations of wrongdoing. He argued the housekeeper caused her injuries by having provoked the attack.
His lawyer argued Doe, “voluntarily teased, abused, and mistreated the dog and thereby provoked the attack.”
He added, “[Doe] invited the injuries now complained of and assumed the risk of them with full knowledge of the magnitude of that risk, in that she knew her foregoing conduct might cause the dog to attack her, and seriously injure her, both of which events are alleged to have occurred."
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
In response, Doe submitted several photos of her alleged injuries that showed the damage to her skin.
The parties are getting prepared for the upcoming trial. As we first reported, Brown demanded Doe not be allowed to proceed anonymously in the case.
He argued pseudonyms were only to be used in "exceptional circumstances."
“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,” his motion reads.
At the recent hearing, the judge sided with Brown and gave Doe 10 days to reveal her name,
