Pras Michel Drops Lawsuit Against Ms. Lauryn Hill Over Fugees Reunion Tour

Fugees’ Pras Michel has dropped a lawsuit he filed in 2024 against his bandmate Ms. Lauryn Hill. The filing, which also named Delaware company MLH Touring, Inc., accused Hill of acting in ways, some fraudulent, that led the Fugees to cancel their 2023 reunion tour three days before it was set to begin. Michel had been pursuing charges of breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, improper accounting, unjust enrichment, fraud, and refusal to permit a tour audit, among others.

Per a March 11 motion, first reported by Rolling Stone and viewed by Pitchfork, the suit has been “dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear his, her or its own expenses, costs, and attorney’s fees.” Pras had initially sought compensation for lost income, as well as punitive damages, legal expenses, and more. He alleged that Hill’s “arrogance” and reputation for being unpunctual to live performances cost him financially, accusing her of refusing a $5 million offer for the Fugees to play Coachella because she would not accept billing below No Doubt. Pitchfork has reached out to lawyers for both Michel and Hill for comment.

The new motion arrives shortly before Pras beings a 14-year prison sentence after being found guilty of criminal conspiracy and illegal foreign lobbying in November 2025. He was charged with campaign finance crimes in 2019 after allegedly funneling money from a Malaysian businessman, Low Taek Jho (aka Jho Low) into former President Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. The case went to trial in 2023, and a federal court found him guilty on 10 charges total; he was denied a retrial in 2024. Rolling Stone reports that he is due to report to prison on March 30.

When Michel first filed his lawsuit against Hill, she shared a statement with Pitchfork calling the lawsuit “baseless” and “full of false claims and unwarranted attacks.” “I’ve been silent and pushing through because I understood that Pras was under duress because of his legal battles and that this was perhaps affecting his judgment, state of mind, and character,” she wrote. “I was not in Pras’ life when he decided to make the unfortunate decision that led to his current legal troubles. I did not advise that he make that decision and therefore am in no way responsible for his decision and its consequences, though I have taken it upon myself to help.”