Chris Brown contests $13 million dog attack verdict

Chris Brown is seeking a new trial in his former housekeeper's dog attack lawsuit.

The Under the Influence singer has argued that the jury's "excessive" $13 million (£9.6 million) verdict was influenced by improper evidence about his 2008 assault of pop star Rihanna.

Brown's lawyers have filed a motion asking to wipe the trial verdict won in June by Maria Avila, who was mauled by a 200-pound dog while cleaning his home six years earlier.

The motion, obtained by Billboard, argues that the trial judge unfairly allowed Avila's attorney to ask an "inherently inflammatory" question during Brown's cross-examination: whether or not he is a convicted felon.

The R&B star answered "Yes, ma'am" to this inquiry, referencing his 2009 guilty plea to assaulting his then-girlfriend Rihanna.

"Mr Brown's conduct in an unrelated domestic-violence matter 17 years prior had no bearing on Plaintiffs' alleged injuries, causation or damages," reads the motion.

"The jury was told that the conviction could be used to determine whether Mr Brown was believable. Thus, it was expressly authorised to discount Mr Brown's testimony based upon a 17-year-old crime of violence having no direct relationship to honesty or veracity."

Brown's lawyers say this and other issues at trial, including the exclusion of evidence that the singer's head of security gave money to Avila's family after the incident, led to an inflated award of damages. They argue that this amount "cannot reasonably be reconciled with the evidence of the injuries and damages actually established at trial".

Avila's lawyers have been making attempts to collect the judgment from Brown. In a court filing last month, they argued that the money should come out of Brown's profits from his ongoing stadium tour with Usher.