This page provides the answers to class members’ most frequently asked questions.
The information provided is in summary form and is not intended as a complete explanation of your rights. For full and complete information, you are directed to review carefully the Notice.
No, you are not being sued.
This lawsuit is about alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq., the Maryland Wage and Hour Law (“MWHL”), Md. Code Ann., Labor & Employment, §3-401 et seq., and the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law (“MWPCL”), Md. Code Ann., Labor & Employment, §3-501 et seq by Sharp Holdings.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to provide updated notice to servers when there was a change in the mandated minimum wage after the servers began their employment. Plaintiff specifically alleges Defendants provided new hires a Tip Credit Notice form and then failed to provide updated information whenever the tip credit amount claimed by Defendants or the cash wage paid by Defendants changed, which occurred each time there was a change in the minimum wage rate. Defendants deny Plaintiff’s allegations in their entirety and assert that at all relevant times, they paid their servers properly and that they provided proper notice of the tip credit.
Class Members are those who worked as servers at IHop restaurants operated by Sharp Holdings, Inc. at any time from June 29, 2019 through November 17, 2024 in the states of Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, or the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The parties in this Litigation disagree as to the probable outcome of the Lawsuit with respect to all issues if it were not settled. While the Plaintiff was prepared to proceed with litigating the case described above, and had obtained summary judgment on the issue of stale tip credit notification, Plaintiff recognizes that litigation is a risky proposition and that she may not have prevailed on any or all of her claims, including on appeal. Defendants expressly deny any wrongdoing or legal liability and were prepared to proceed with litigating the case if a settlement had not been reached, including, if necessary, on appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
This Settlement is the result of good-faith, arms-length negotiations between the Plaintiff and Defendants, through their respective attorneys along with the assistance of a Magistrate Judge from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Both sides agree that, in light of the risks and expense associated with continued litigation, this Settlement is fair and appropriate under the circumstances, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class.
Defendant has agreed to deposit a total of $2,015,000.00 (the “Gross Settlement Amount”) into a fund to be divided among current and former employees who are covered by the Settlement Agreement. The Gross Settlement Amount shall cover payments to Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and costs, payments to the Representative Plaintiff for his services to the Class, taxes, and the costs of administering the Settlement. The remaining amount, after attorneys’ fees and costs, service payment, taxes, and administrative fees have been deducted (the “Net Settlement Fund”), shall be divided among Class Members based on a pro rata allocation based on the number of weeks worked per Class Member over the applicable claim period.
The Claims Administrator has calculated your “Estimated Settlement Payment” as follows: First, the Claims Administrator deducted from the Settlement Amount (i) the anticipated amount of attorneys’ fees to be requested (one-third (1/3) of the Settlement Amount), plus estimated expenses of Class Counsel, (ii) the maximum Service Payment sought for the Plaintiff, (iii) the estimated fees and expenses of the Claims Administrator and (iv) the total of the 80/20 Payments for all Settlement Class Members. The resulting number is the “Estimated Net Settlement Amount.”
For each Putative Settlement Class Member, the Claims Administrator totaled the amount of tip credit taken by Defendants for all Tip Credit Hours worked during the Class Period as reflected in the Payroll Data. For example, if an individual was paid $3.63 per hour, resulting in Defendants taking a tip credit of $8.87 per hour, and that employee worked 100 hours during the Class Period, that individual would be owed $887.00. This number will be referred to as the “Estimated Individual Tip Credit Amount.” The Estimated Individual Tip Credit Amounts for all Putative Settlement Class Members were then added together by the Claims Administrator to determine the “Estimated Total Tip Credit Amount.”
The Estimated Net Settlement Amount was then divided by the Estimated Total Tip Credit Amount. The Claims Administrator will then multiply the resulting fractional amount by each Estimated Individual Tip Credit Amount and add in the 80/20 Payment to determine that Putative Settlement Class Member’s “Estimated Settlement Payment.” Notably, each Settlement Class Member will receive $50 to cover the 80/20 claim alleged in the Complaint.
If the Court grants final approval of the Settlement, your individual Settlement Payments will be calculated using a similar methodology, except that: (a) the Claims Administrator will begin the calculation by deducting from the Settlement only those costs, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and Service Payments awarded by the Court in its Final Approval Order; and (b) the calculation will exclude the hours worked by a Putative Settlement Class Member who are not members of any of the Classes (i.e., individuals who submit a request to exclude themselves from the Settlement).
Class Members do not need to do anything to receive the payment under the Settlement. You will be sent a settlement check if and when the Court approves the settlement and after all appeals have been exhausted, if any such appeals result in approval of the Settlement.
The Court has decided that the lawyers at Connolly Wells & Gray, LLP are qualified to represent you and all Class Members. These lawyers are called “Class Counsel.” Specifically, if you choose to remain in the Class you are represented by Gerald D. Wells III, from Connolly Wells & Gray, LLP. You will not be separately charged for these lawyers; their fees are being covered by the settlement fund. You do not need to retain your own attorney in order to participate as a Class Member. If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, you may hire one at your own expense; that lawyer will not be entitled to receive fees from the settlement fund.
If you are a Class Member, you can object to the Settlement if you do not like any part of it. You can give reasons why you think the Court should not approve it. The Court will consider your views. To object, you must send a letter by mail that includes the words “I object to the settlement in the King v Sharp Holdings settlement.” as well as all reasons for the objection. Be sure to include your name, job title, address, telephone number, and your signature. Mail the objection to:
King v Sharp Holdings Case
P.O. Box 2006
Chanhassen, MN 55317-2006
Your letter must be postmarked no later than September 29, 2025.
Yes. You may exclude yourself from the Settlement Class by submitting the Request for Exclusion (enclosed as the red document in the Notice Packet). You may also exercise this option by sending a letter by mail to the Claims Administrator that states:
“I request to be excluded from the Rule 23 Class and/or FLSA Collective in King vs. Sharp Holding, Inc., et al., No. 22-cv-00728-PTG-JFA. I affirm that I was employed by Defendants as a server in the state of Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, or the Commonwealth of Virginia on one or more days between June 29, 2019 through [last date by which defendants provided payroll records for], and have been identified as a member of the Rule 23 Class and/or FLSA Collective.”
Any Putative Settlement Class Member who wishes to opt-out must also include his or her full name, address, and telephone number. Putative Settlement Class Members may not exclude themselves by telephone, fax, or email. Requests for Exclusion, if mailed, should be sent to:
King v Sharp Holdings Case
P.O. Box 2006
Chanhassen, MN 55317-2006
Your letter must be postmarked no later than September 29, 2025.
If you timely complete and submit a red Request for Exclusion, you will not receive any money from the Settlement attributable to your claims. If you opt out, you will not be subject to the Release of Claims set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Please note that unless you submit a Request for Exclusion, the release of claims contained in the Settlement Agreement will have the same force and effect upon you as if the Settlement Agreement were executed by you.
The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing on October 9, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 801, 401 Courthouse Square, Alexandria, VA 22314 to determine whether to grant final approval.
At this hearing the Court will consider whether the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. If there are objections, the Court will consider them. The Court will listen to people who have asked to speak at the hearing. The Court may also decide how much to pay Class Counsel. After the hearing, the Court will decide whether to approve the Settlement. We do not know how long these decisions will take.
You may contact the Settlement Administrator at KingvSharpHoldingInc@noticeadministrator.com.