Kylie Jenner Chef Lawsuit, Miscarriage, Jane Doe Hearing

Kylie Jenner’s former private chef is asking a Los Angeles court to let her keep suing as “Jane Doe.” She alleges pregnancy discrimination, a failure to accommodate a high-risk pregnancy, long hours, retaliation and wrongful termination. She also alleges that physically demanding work contributed to a miscarriage in February 2025.

On November 12, 2026, reports of a court filing showed that Jenner’s lawyers are asking the judge to make the chef use her real name in the public record. A hearing on that request is set for January 28, 2027.

The chef filed the case on June 22, 2026. Jenner’s side disputes the allegations, including whether Jenner personally employed her. No court has found that Jenner or any defendant caused the pregnancy loss, broke employment law or wrongfully fired the chef.

Kylie Jenner Chef Lawsuit: Quick Facts

Detail	Latest information
Case	Jane Doe v. Paleo Collective LLC, et al.
Case number	26STCV19827
Court	Los Angeles County Superior Court, California
Plaintiff	Former private chef proceeding as Jane Doe
Defendants named	Kylie Jenner, Kylie Jenner Inc., Paleo Collective LLC, Tri Star Sports & Entertainment Group Inc., Natalie Pukasemvarangkoon and Itzel Sibrian
Plaintiff’s attorney	Della Shaker
Jenner’s attorney	Michael Rhodes
Filed	June 22, 2026
Employment period alleged	About November 2024 to March 2025
Main claims	Pregnancy discrimination, failure to accommodate, retaliation, wage and hour violations, wrongful termination
Miscarriage alleged	February 2025
Causes of action	22, per a reproduction of the September 10, 2026 ruling
Latest dispute	Whether Jane Doe may stay anonymous
Next reported hearing	January 28, 2027
Damages sought	Unspecified; jury trial requested
Settlement or judgment	None verified

Why Is Kylie Jenner’s Former Chef Suing Her?

According to the complaint as reported by the Los Angeles Times and other outlets, the chef was assigned to Jenner’s residence around Thanksgiving 2024. She says she worked about five days a week, often 11 to 12 hours a day. In December 2024 she told supervisors she was about three months pregnant and needed accommodations because of a high-risk pregnancy. She says requests for lighter duties and extra help were ignored.

What happened on New Year’s Eve 2024?

The chef alleges supervisors told her to move heavy food items uphill and across a street with no help. She says she became dizzy and had trouble breathing, and security staff had to help her. The complaint offers this as an example of management ignoring her health. It does not show that Jenner personally gave that order.

What Happened at the February 2025 Palm Springs Birthday Party?

The most serious allegations involve a February 1, 2025 birthday party for one of Jenner’s children at Jenner’s Palm Springs property. The chef says she was about five months pregnant and was assigned heavy food preparation and service work. She says she asked for help, did not get enough, and was exhausted and strained during the event. She alleges that the next morning she woke up bleeding, went to an emergency room and was told she had lost the pregnancy.

The claim that her working conditions contributed to the miscarriage is an allegation, not a finding. Proving it would likely take medical records and expert testimony about her pregnancy, her history and the physical demands of the work.

What happened after the pregnancy loss?

The chef says she suffered severe emotional distress and depression. She alleges a supervisor reprimanded her over her emotional state and criticized the state of the kitchen, and that her requests for leave and accommodations were mishandled. She says she was removed from the household assignment around March 2025 and calls that retaliation and pregnancy-related discrimination. The complaint also reportedly refers to a May 2025 settlement-and-release proposal from management. A pre-suit proposal does not mean any party agreed to settle or admitted fault. The defendants dispute the allegations.

Why Does Kylie Jenner Want the Chef to Reveal Her Real Name?

This is the main new development. Jenner’s attorneys challenged the chef’s use of a pseudonym in an October 23 filing. As reported, they argue that:

anonymity is a rare exception, and similar cases proceed under real names;
the chef already revealed her first name in her own filing;
her medical details can be protected by protective orders and targeted redactions, so she can proceed under her real name;
she chose a public lawsuit instead of confidential arbitration; and
her attorney’s discussions with the press mean she is using publicity as a “sword” while relying on anonymity as a “shield.”

Why does the chef want to stay anonymous?

In an October 16 declaration, the chef described the pregnancy loss and related medical details as deeply private. She says being publicly named could cause more emotional harm and hurt her career, noting that private chefs depend on discretion. Her lawyer says Jenner already knows who she is and has asked what naming her accomplishes “other than to subject her to further scrutiny,” suggesting the goal is to pressure her to settle. Neither side’s position controls yet.

Kylie Jenner Chef Lawsuit, Former Private Chef Fights to Stay Anonymous as Jane Doe After Pregnancy Discrimination and Miscarriage Claims

What Does California Law Say About Suing as Jane Doe?

California law generally expects parties to be named. California Code of Civil Procedure § 422.40 requires a complaint to state the names of the parties. Courts allow pseudonyms in limited circumstances, and the rules come from several sources:

Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Superior Court, 82 Cal.App.5th 105 (2022). The Court of Appeal said judges must weigh a plaintiff’s privacy interest against the public’s right of access to court proceedings and ask whether a less restrictive option would work.
Doe v. Lincoln Unified School District, 188 Cal.App.4th 758 (2010). The court discussed when a plaintiff may use a fictitious name.
California Rules of Court 2.550 and 2.551 and NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court, 20 Cal.4th 1178 (1999). These set the standards for sealing records and the public’s right of access to civil proceedings.

What has the judge already decided about the Jenner chef case?

A September 10, 2026 ruling, available through a public reproduction, notes that the file was sealed on June 22 and unsealed on July 22. The judge treated the chef’s request to unseal it as moot because the file was already public. The ruling identified her use of a pseudonym as an issue for the court. It did not order her to reveal her identity. The anonymity dispute is still unresolved.

Which California Pregnancy Discrimination Laws Apply to the Chef’s Claims?

The reported claims arise under California law.

Pregnancy accommodation and leave: Government Code § 12945

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) requires covered employers to reasonably accommodate pregnancy-related conditions and to provide pregnancy disability leave of up to four months where the requirements are met. Possible accommodations include lighter duties, more breaks and modified assignments. According to the California Civil Rights Department, these protections generally apply to employers with five or more employees.

Discrimination, retaliation and failure to prevent: Government Code § 12940

Section 12940 bars discrimination, harassment and retaliation. It also makes it unlawful to fail to provide a reasonable accommodation (§ 12940(m)), to retaliate against someone who asks for one (§ 12940(m)(2)), and to fail to take reasonable steps to prevent discrimination (§ 12940(k)). The chef must prove the elements. Showing that her assignment ended after a miscarriage is not enough.

Who can be sued under FEHA?

California law does not generally impose personal liability on individual supervisors for discrimination or retaliation (Reno v. Baird, 18 Cal.4th 640 (1998); Jones v. Lodge at Torrey Pines Partnership, 42 Cal.4th 1158 (2008)). Individuals can be liable for harassment under § 12940(j)(3). That affects how the claims against the named individuals would be judged.

FEHA procedure

FEHA claims generally require filing with the California Civil Rights Department and getting a right-to-sue notice before filing in court (Government Code § 12960 and following). The chef’s complaint is reported as already filed, and we did not review whether her administrative steps were completed.

Federal pregnancy laws

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k)) and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000gg and following) also protect pregnant workers at covered employers with 15 or more employees. The reported claims here are state-law claims.

Wrongful termination in violation of public policy

California recognizes a claim when an employee is fired for reasons that violate fundamental public policy (Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 27 Cal.3d 167 (1980)). It depends on who employed her, why her assignment ended and whether the reasons were legitimate.

Can the chef recover damages for the miscarriage itself?

Possibly, but it is harder than a wage claim. She would need to prove liability, a legally recoverable injury and causation. A failure to accommodate does not by itself prove it caused a pregnancy loss. Workers’ compensation exclusivity (Labor Code §§ 3600 and 3602) can also limit civil claims for injuries that arise from employment, though discrimination claims under FEHA generally can proceed separately.

Was Kylie Jenner’s Chef Misclassified as an Independent Contractor?

The chef alleges she was wrongly treated as an independent contractor. California Labor Code § 2775 generally applies the “ABC test” from Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018), to decide whether a worker is an employee, subject to statutory exceptions. The hiring entity must show that the worker is free from its control, does work outside its usual business, and is independently established in that trade. A contract calling someone a contractor does not decide the question.

Could the chef recover overtime and meal and rest break pay?

California Wage Order No. 15 covers household occupations, including household cooks. According to the California Department of Industrial Relations, qualifying non-live-in household workers who are not personal attendants generally receive overtime after eight hours in a day or 40 hours in a week. Labor Code § 510 sets overtime rules, and § 226.7 covers meal and rest periods. The alleged 11- to 12-hour shifts could matter, but her classification, hours, pay and exceptions would decide any entitlement.

Is Kylie Jenner Personally Responsible for the Chef’s Working Conditions?

Being named does not make someone personally liable. Jenner’s attorneys dispute that she employed the chef. The complaint names several businesses and individuals allegedly involved in hiring, scheduling or supervising her.

California looks closely at who is an “employer.” Under Martinez v. Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35 (2010), a defendant can be an employer for wage claims by controlling wages, hours or working conditions, by suffering or permitting the work, or by creating a common-law employment relationship. Several defendants could qualify as joint employers, or none might. Liability does not follow only because the work took place at Jenner’s home or because a company is tied to her.

What about arbitration?

Jenner’s lawyers argue the chef chose public court over confidential arbitration. California courts enforce arbitration of FEHA claims only if the agreement meets certain fairness standards (Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc., 24 Cal.4th 83 (2000)). Federal law also allows plaintiffs to avoid forced arbitration of sexual harassment claims (9 U.S.C. §§ 401 and 402). We did not see any arbitration agreement in the reports.

How Much Is Kylie Jenner Being Sued For?

The chef seeks unspecified damages and other relief and has requested a jury trial. Reported claims include unpaid wages, lost income, emotional distress and other harm. If the legal requirements are met, remedies could include statutory penalties, attorney’s fees and punitive damages. Punitive damages under Civil Code § 3294 require clear and convincing proof of malice, oppression or fraud, and for an employer generally require that an officer, director or managing agent authorized or ratified the conduct. There is no judgment, fixed award or completed settlement.

Is the Chef’s Lawsuit Connected to Other Kylie Jenner Employee Lawsuits?

It is one of four publicly reported lawsuits from former household staff in 2026. Two housekeepers sued in April, the chef sued in June and another former worker sued in November alleging injuries and denied help. They are separate cases, not a class action. All four plaintiffs are reported to be represented by Della Shaker, and Jenner’s attorney Michael Rhodes has said the defendants will defend the cases vigorously.

For the overview, see Kylie Jenner Lawsuit 2026, Fourth Ex-Employee Sues Over Dog Bite, Locked Closet, Pepper Spray and Alleged Wrongful Firing. The two earlier cases are covered in Angelica Vasquez vs. Kylie Jenner Hostile Work Environment And Employment Discrimination Lawsuit and Juana Delgado Soto vs. Kylie Jenner, The 2nd Housekeeper Lawsuit and What the Filing Actually Says.

What Happens Next in the Kylie Jenner Chef Lawsuit?

The January 28, 2027 hearing in Los Angeles Superior Court is about whether the chef can keep using Jane Doe. It is not a trial on the pregnancy discrimination claims or on what caused her miscarriage. The main claims may move through further motions, discovery, mediation or trial. Evidence could include schedules, contracts, accommodation requests, messages with supervisors, payroll records and medical testimony. No ruling on the main claims had been verified as of November 13, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions About Kylie Jenner’s Chef Lawsuit

Why is Kylie Jenner’s former chef suing her?

She alleges pregnancy discrimination, failure to accommodate a high-risk pregnancy, long hours, retaliation, unpaid wages and wrongful termination.

Did Kylie Jenner’s chef have a miscarriage?

She alleges she lost her pregnancy in February 2025 after physically demanding work. The claim that her working conditions contributed to it has not been proven.

Who is the chef suing Kylie Jenner?

She is identified only as Jane Doe. Whether she can stay anonymous is the subject of the January 28, 2027 hearing.

Why does Kylie Jenner want the chef’s name revealed?

Her attorneys say anonymity is a rare exception and that the chef’s medical privacy can be protected through redactions and protective orders.

Is Kylie Jenner personally the chef’s employer?

Jenner’s side disputes it. The court may have to decide who legally employed the chef.

Was the chef fired after her miscarriage?

She alleges she was removed from her assignment around March 2025. The defendants deny wrongdoing.

Has Kylie Jenner settled with the chef?

No settlement has been verified.

When is the next hearing?

January 28, 2027, in Los Angeles Superior Court, on the anonymity request.

Is this a class action?

No. It is an individual employment lawsuit.

Bottom Line: Where the Kylie Jenner Chef Lawsuit Stands

Jenner’s former private chef alleges pregnancy discrimination, excessive work demands, wage violations and wrongful termination, and says the work contributed to a February 2025 miscarriage. The newest fight is over whether she can keep suing as Jane Doe. The January 28, 2027 hearing may decide how her identity is handled but will not decide the main claims.

Two questions remain unanswered: whether the defendants violated California employment law, and whether the work caused the injuries claimed. Neither has been decided.

Sources and legal references

Court records

Official California law and guidance

News reporting

Source limitation: The September ruling comes from a public reproduction. Details of the October 16 and October 23 filings and the January 28 hearing come from news reports. We did not retrieve the recent motion papers from the court’s portal.

Disclaimer: AllAboutLawyer.com provides general legal information, not legal or medical advice. Allegations are unproven unless admitted or established by a court.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the public court ruling in Case No. 26STCV19827, California’s official statutes and agency guidance, and published news reports (TMZ, Page Six and the Los Angeles Times), as of November 13, 2026. Last Updated: November 13, 2026.

About the Author

Israr Ahmad is a legal content researcher with 4+ years of experience covering class action settlements and consumer rights cases. He has researched and published coverage of 2,500+ settlements using verified court records, settlement administrator filings, and government sources. Learn more about Israr.