Kylie Jenner Has Now Been Sued Four Times by Former Staff — Then Her Lawyers Made a Move the Chef Says Is Meant to Silence Her

The door to the closet was supposed to be easy. A supervisor gave her the passcode, and the housekeeper stepped inside Kylie Jenner’s walk-in closet to do her job. Then, according to a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles, the door closed behind her — and stayed shut for more than an hour.

She says she called her supervisor in a panic, telling her she was trapped and having a panic attack. The answer, as quoted in the complaint, was not help. The supervisor allegedly “laughed and mocked” her, then said: “No one is at the house that can let you out and I cannot give the password to anyone else, you just have to wait.”

That scene is one of the most talked-about allegations in a fight that has now put one of the most famous women in America on the receiving end of four lawsuits in seven months. And this weekend, Page Six reported, a source close to the case says the worst may not be over.

The Lawsuit Behind the Locked Door

The woman is Dinora Carolina Cabria Amaya, a former housekeeper who says she began working for Jenner in March 2025. Her lawsuit, filed Nov. 5 in Los Angeles Superior Court, names Jenner, her companies and two staff members, Laura Dooley and Itzel Sibrian. It accuses them of disability discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination and wage violations.

Amaya claims she was paid $40 an hour in cash and typically worked six days a week without proper overtime. Then come the injuries. She alleges that while cleaning a drawer in a laundry room in September 2025, an unsecured can of pepper spray went off directly into her face, leaving her with “blurry vision, burning, itching, dryness, irritation, and a constant sand-like sensation,” in the words of the complaint, as quoted by the Los Angeles Times.

The following month, she says, she was sent to clean a doghouse at one of Jenner’s properties and was bitten. “Again, no meaningful assistance was provided,” the suit reads. She says she bought over-the-counter medicine and treated the wound herself. The more she complained, she claims, the heavier her workload became. She says she was fired on Feb. 6.

None of this has been proven in court.

Three Women Before Her

Amaya is the fourth former household employee to sue Jenner since April, and all four are represented by the same attorney, Della Shaker.

First came Angelica Hernandez Vasquez, on April 17. A housekeeper who says she started in September 2024, she accuses Jenner and her companies of discrimination, harassment and retaliation, alleging she was mocked over her Salvadoran background and her Catholic faith.

Twelve days later, on April 29, Juana Delgado Soto filed her own suit. She claims she was forbidden from looking at or smiling at Jenner and told to “disappear” whenever the star was nearby. She says she once slipped a letter onto Jenner’s massage bed pleading for help — “I need to express just how terribly I am mentally abused,” she wrote, according to the complaint — and was threatened with termination the next day.

The third case, filed June 22, is the one that has hit hardest. A private chef, identified only as Jane Doe, says she told supervisors in December 2024 that she was about three months pregnant and needed accommodations. She alleges she was still handed grueling shifts, including a child’s birthday celebration in Palm Springs on Feb. 1, 2025. By the next morning, she says, she was bleeding and at a hospital, where she was told there was no detectable heartbeat. She says she lay alone there for more than nine hours.

Days later, she claims, a supervisor scolded her for being upset: “Stop it, just stop it. You are upsetting Kylie. You are making her depressed.”

The Move That Changed the Fight

Jenner has never addressed the claims herself. Her legal team has. “These latest cases are being brought by the same lawyer who previously filed claims on behalf of Kylie’s former household staff,” her legal representative Michael Rhodes told Page Six. “It’s clear that this lawyer wants to use publicity to try and extract an unwarranted payday. We’re not going to be intimidated into doing that. As such, we’ll defend these meritless cases vigorously.”

Then, in court filings first reported by Page Six this week, Jenner’s lawyers went further. In an Oct. 23 filing, they asked the judge to make the Jane Doe chef drop her anonymity and file under her real name. They argued that “Plaintiff’s pregnancy allegations do not satisfy the high bar to proceed anonymously,” and that she could have avoided press attention by sticking to a confidential arbitration agreement she had signed. “Rather than avoid the limelight,” they wrote, “Plaintiff affirmatively sought it out.” In the same filing, Jenner’s side disputed that Jenner employed the chef.

Shaker’s answer was furious. “Kylie Jenner already knows the identity of Jane Doe,” she told Page Six. “The question is why she believes the public needs to know it, too.” She asked whether the aim was “justice” or “to make the consequences of speaking out so unbearable that my client feels compelled to settle.”

The chef herself had pleaded with the court in a sworn declaration: “These are among the most private and painful experiences of my life.” A hearing on the question is set for Jan. 28, 2027.

“This Isn’t the End”

The line that pushed the story back into the headlines came Saturday morning. “There are more lawsuits against Kylie coming. This isn’t the end,” a source told Page Six exclusively. “The claims are substantially similar to the current lawsuits.”

Shaker has said her firm has spoken with “dozens of employees” who fear retaliation, and being blacklisted, if they speak out. In a statement to the Los Angeles Times, she added that “no amount of wealth, fame, power, or influence places anyone above the law.” After the latest filing, she told Page Six the case raises a bigger question: “how many domestic workers are afraid to report unlawful treatment because they believe their employers are too powerful to challenge?”

Jenner’s side says the answer is none of this: that the suits are a publicity play by one lawyer chasing a payday. A judge, and eventually perhaps a jury, will decide which story holds up.

For now, every claim here remains an allegation, and nothing has been decided. But the case that began with a passcode and a closet door has grown into a fight over who gets to stay anonymous, who gets to be heard — and how many more names are still to come.

What are your thoughts?