Khloé Kardashian’s fashion company, Good American, demanded the cancer-stricken ex-employee suing for alleged discrimination submit to a mental examination before trial, In Touch can exclusively report.

On May 23, lawyers for Good American and Khloé’s business partner, Emma Grede, filed court docs, obtained by In Touch, which asked the court to sign off on the former employee, Brooke, being examined by a medical professional.

Khloé, 40, and Emma, 42, launched the company in 2016.

In her suit, Brooke claimed she was hired in 2019 and received positive reviews throughout. She said issues started after she asked for accommodations due to her health.

Good American and Emma denied all allegations of wrongdoing. In her suit, Brooke claimed the defendants caused her to suffer mental and emotional injuries, including anxiety, stress, self-doubt, worry, frustration, depression and embarrassment.

The lawyer for the defendants said Brooke revealed that she had received therapy for her alleged injuries. The attorney said they tried to get Brooke to agree to an independent medical exam by a doctor they selected.

Brooke allegedly refused to engage with the request.

The lawyer argued, “[Brooke’s] allegations of emotional and mental distress make it clear that her emotional and mental states are ‘in controversy’, and as [Brooke] will surely seek to recover such damages should she prevail on his claims. Therefore, good cause exists to compel the mental examination of [Brooke].”

He added, “The requested examination will allow Defendants to adequately defend themselves against [Brooke’s] claims of emotional and mental distress as alleged in [Brooke’s] Complaint, and will also allow Defendants to test the veracity of [Brooke’s] mental and emotional distress claims.” The court has yet to rule on the matter.

As In Touch previously reported, in her lawsuit, Brooke claimed she was hired by Good American in 2019 as a Marketing Intern.

She said she received various promotions and rave reviews over the years.

In 2023, Brooke, who had previously been treated for cancer (Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma), submitted a doctor’s note to her bosses.

The note from UCLA Department of Medicine said Brooke was immunocompromised and had recently been discharged from the hospital.

The letter said Brooke should work remotely until she had finished another round of treatment. Brooke said the defendants were not happy and pressured her to take a medical leave instead of working remotely.

She said she was told her accommodations were undermining the organization.

Later, Brooke said she saw a job listing for her role.

The next month, she said Good American laid her off due to a company-wide “layoff.”

Brooke does not believe it was a “layoff” but rather Good American getting rid of her due to her disability.

She sued seeking unspecified damages for wrongful termination, cancer discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Good American and Emma denied all allegations of wrongdoing in the case.

An attorney for the defendants argued, “To the extent [Brooke] suffered any symptoms of mental or emotional distress or injury, it was the result of pre-existing psychological disorders or alternative concurrent causes, and not the result of any act or omission of Defendants.”

In addition, the lawyer alleged, “[Brooke] is barred from claiming any injuries or damages because such injuries and damages are the sole, direct and proximate result of [Brooke’s] conduct.”

Good American and Emma claimed Brooke had preexisting conditions due to her cancer.

“[Brooke] had preexisting mental distress due to cancer and other alternative causes that existed before she was terminated. Any alleged emotional distress was not due to the alleged actions of Defendants,” the response argued.

Good American claimed all decisions made were business-related and not discriminatory.