Kylie Jenner Sued by Second Housekeeper in Two Weeks , Inside the Lawsuits Reshaping the Beauty Mogul’s Public Image

The two lawsuits filed against Kylie Jenner over the last two weeks have resulted in the kind of domestic worker narrative that is usually overlooked by most celebrity journalism. The initial complaint was submitted to Los Angeles County Superior Court on April 17, 2026, by former housekeeper Angelica Hernandez Vasquez. Thirteen days later, on April 30, Juana Delgado Soto, another former maid who had worked for Jenner for around six years, filed her own case. Della Shaker, the same lawyer, represents both.

Both claim similar patterns of mistreatment, including salary violations, harassment, racial discrimination, and retribution against workers who filed complaints. Jenner, her business Kylie Jenner Inc., Itzel Sibrian, a staff supervisor, and the staffing firms Tri Star Services and La Maison Family Services are all defendants in both instances. At this point, the accusations are still unsubstantiated. Since the reality TV star hasn’t yet viewed the files, Jenner’s reps have declined to comment in public.

The claims in Soto’s 31-page complaint read like a specific type of escalation that occasionally occurs in cases involving household help. In May 2019, Soto started working with Jenner. The complaint claims that during the first few years of her employment, she was denied meal and rest breaks; that when Sibrian took over as her direct supervisor in late 2023, the abuse and harassment escalated; and that Sibrian ridiculed her English, called her “stupid,” and made fun of her accent and immigration status.

According to Soto, she lodged an HR complaint in 2024. According to reports, Sibrian was temporarily suspended before being reinstated. According to Soto, the retaliation that ensued included giving her unrealistic workloads, altering her schedule to remove overtime, and cutting her hourly wage from $41.66 to $35.00 without providing a rationale. If shown by discovery, the pattern would be precisely the kind of behavior that California labor law expressly forbids.

Soto claims to have written a direct letter to Jenner in April 2025, which is the most startling accusation in her case. Soto claims that she put a lengthy note on Jenner’s massage bed right before a planned massage because she was frustrated with the management’s alleged continuous unwillingness to address her issues. The letter reads as follows: “I need to express just how terribly I am mentally abused” as well as “I really apologize for letting you know about all these situations, I know you wouldn’t allow this to happen, if you were aware of it.”

Soto claims she was threatened with termination the day after the letter was delivered and told not to get in touch with Jenner ever again. She claims that after visiting an emergency room two days later, she was told to take a week off. The complaint’s account declined her request for sick leave and reminded her that she had signed a non-disclosure agreement. It is genuinely unclear from the documentation whether Jenner received or read the letter.

Soto’s case contains post-letter allegations that go into more detail than defamation-conscious litigators usually make without supporting documents. Soto claims that when she went back to work, she was informed that she was “no longer allowed” to smile at Jenner, look at her, or stay in a room if Jenner came in. In order to prove she wasn’t taking the remaining food home, she allegedly had to take pictures of it in the garbage.

The complaint states that she was “forced to clean defendant Jenner’s boyfriend’s house”; however, the boyfriend is not named in the lawsuit. Previous reported occurrences include being urged to “report to work immediately,” denied time off following her brother’s unexpected death, and being made to miss her own surprise birthday party because Sibrian allegedly told her that “no one cares about your birthday, Kylie is having a dinner.”

The Vasquez case has some of the same basic components but covers a significantly shorter time frame, from September 2024 to August 2025. Vasquez, a Salvadoran lady who herself as a devout Catholic, claims she experienced “hostility and exclusion” from the moment she moved into Jenner’s Hidden Hills home. Using just first names, the complaint names a supervisor as “Elsi” and a head housekeeper as “Patsy.” Vasquez claims that because of her color, national origin, and religion, she was “assigned the most difficult and undesirable tasks” and humiliated in front of coworkers.

Coat hangers are said to have been hurled at her feet by March 2025. She resigned in July 2025 after taking a medical leave of absence due to “anxiety, severe stress, and symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder,” according to her. Notably, the named-defendant allegations in Vasquez’s case focus on Kylie Jenner Inc., the staffing agencies, and 25 other persons rather than directly accusing Jenner of bullying behavior.

Given that the same lawyer represented both plaintiffs in these two instances, it seems likely that the employment practices of housekeeping staff in high-net-worth Los Angeles homes will be subject to more judicial scrutiny than they usually are. A clear framework has been established by Della Shaker for both clients: “No one should have to choose between their paycheque and their dignity.” The Soto complaint alleges racial discrimination, failure to pay wages and overtime, failure to accommodate a disability, and whistleblower retaliation. If a jury finds any of these allegations true, it could result in significant compensation and punitive damages.