Kindness built a small ice-cream shop into a lifeline, yet one lawsuit nearly melted it down. The “DQ Sisters” in Medford, New York, hired people needing a second chance and backed them with real help. Then a legal shock over how often they paid staff put everything at risk, from savings to trust, and forced them to learn payroll rules the hard way while rallying a community that refused to let them fall.
A community-first franchise with second chances
Patty DeMint and Michelle Robey opened on New Year’s Eve 2017 and quickly earned a loyal crowd. They hired workers returning from addiction or jail because they believed recovery grows with steady work. The store became a place where a shift meant dignity, and a schedule meant hope people could count on.
The sisters also gave when paychecks could not stretch. They covered emergencies, brought gifts for kids, and treated their crew like family because support at home helps performance at work. That thoughtful approach, while informal, built trust. It also created expectations they met with patience, clear talks, and constant presence on the floor.
Everything changed in 2019 when a former employee left and pursued a lawsuit. The sisters had tried to part on good terms, even offering breakfast and continued help. The claim still landed hard. Shock rose to fear as they saw the scale of the case, and how a technical rule could undo years of effort.
The hidden lawsuit trigger in New York’s pay rules
New York’s Frequency of Pay rule covers “manual workers,” which the state interprets broadly, including many routine physical tasks. Those workers must be paid weekly, not every two weeks, because timing shapes cash flow. The standard surprises owners because the threshold is only a quarter of work hours.
The sisters paid biweekly, a mainstream rhythm that no one flagged, not even their payroll provider or a state Department of Labor audit. The former employee’s claim first cited overtime and other labor items, then evolved into a class action. That turn changed leverage and raised exposure in ways they never expected.
Cases like theirs multiplied, according to news reports, as firms recruited claimants online. A labor attorney called it a “gotcha” use of a technical rule, because pay arrived, just not weekly. The lawsuit risk ballooned since penalties and interest stack up fast, while legal fees rise, and settlements can outpace profits.
Human cost, best practices, and compliance habits
Counsel warned the sisters that the law’s wording left little room. They had paid every hour, yet the calendar beat them. Rather than risk total ruin, they settled for $450,000. That choice stung, although it protected jobs, vendors, and a shop that anchors a neighborhood where small comforts carry big weight.
After fees, former employees saw about $200 each, a gap that felt painful because outcomes rarely match headlines. The lawsuit drained reserves and morale, while the sisters kept paying suppliers and wages. Legal math can feel abstract; local owners, however, live the shortfalls in rent, inventory, and a month’s payroll buffer.
They liquidated retirement accounts, borrowed from friends, and asked their mother to collateralize her house because the bills kept coming. They still owe $150,000 and face their own legal costs. A GoFundMe passed $55,000, mostly five, ten, or twenty dollars, which said customers and coworkers believed the shop still mattered.
Numbers that changed the debate and the sisters’ fight
Rather than disappear, they knocked on doors in Albany and found lawmakers open to practical fixes. As of May, businesses paying biweekly face interest on “late” wages, not crushing damages. The update keeps pressure on compliance while avoiding penalties that close doors and erase entry-level jobs people need.
They may try to recover part of the hit through separate claims, because fairness cuts both ways when rules shift midstream. That step will still take time, yet it reflects a broader goal: make standards clear, keep wages prompt, and ensure a lawsuit is not the default remedy when timing can be corrected.
Owners can lower risk with disciplined habits. ADP warns that payroll errors—like worker misclassification, workers’ comp mistakes, or Equal Pay Act gaps—invite penalties and back pay. Good software, checklists, and calendar alerts help. Document policies, train managers, and review audits, because compliance grows stronger when routines are simple and written.
What this lawsuit means for employers and workers
Workers have powerful tools, including the Fair Labor Standards Act, which protects minimum wage and overtime. Advocacy groups say trust your instincts because if a paycheck looks off, it often is. Start with the facts on your pay stub, then ask questions with dates and totals while staying calm and precise.
A 2024 Economic Policy Institute review found over $1.5 billion in stolen wages recovered between 2021 and 2023. That scale shows wage theft touches many sectors and incomes, while honest mistakes still cause harm. Keep personal time records, because a clean log turns debates into fixes. It also shortens any lawsuit path.
Employees can compare notes, loop in human resources, and seek counsel when problems repeat, because patterns matter. Owners, meanwhile, should find mentors at larger firms, price legal reviews, and build emergency funds into budgets. Hidden costs appear in hiring, training, and insurance; planning absorbs shocks and protects both sides of the counter.
Why their story still resonates far beyond Medford today
The sisters feared the lawsuit would break them; the community proved otherwise. Customers gave small sums with big love, and staff stayed. They lost money, yet they kept their mission. The lesson travels: clear rules, fair pay timing, and steady kindness can coexist—when people choose repair over blame and build better systems together.
