Lauryn Hill hits back at lawsuit from Fugees’ Pras Michel
On October 1st, it was reported that the Fugees member Pras Michel had filed a substantial lawsuit against his bandmate Lauryn Hill. He claimed that their cancelled North American tour was due to Hill’s mismanagement, and negligence concerning setup, marketing and budgeting.
Following the tour cancellation, Hill blamed the media for negatively affecting ticket sales by establishing her ostensible lack of punctuality, which she claimed ultimately led to the tour being pulled. However, Michel’s document – filed with the New York South District Attorney – now asserts that her very public rebuke of the media “was actually a veiled and devious attempt to make a big score for herself.”
Michel’s complaint contends that Hill embezzled money from the ticket pre-sales, leaving himself and Fugees bandmate Wyclef Jean empty-handed and financially exposed. The complete list of claims includes fraud, fraud in the inducement, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, accounting, and refusal to permit an audit of the Fugees’ tour.
Michel maintains that the Fugees tour would have made significant money and that he lost out on vast income due to Hill’s organisational approach. He insists that it “would have been a huge commercial success, since most of shows for the entire arena size tour were sold out in advance.” He also describes the ‘Tell Him’ vocalist as an underhand individual who exhibits “narcissistic tendencies.”
What is Lauryn Hill’s reponse?
After Michel’s stinging barrage of claims, the world waited for Hill to respond, and now she has, with her own incendiary story. In her statement, she called Michel’s suit “baseless” and claimed that she incorporated the Fugees to “aid [Michél’s] legal defense” in his ongoing court battle with the Department of Justice regarding the 1MDB scandal.
“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,” Hill said in a statement provided to Rolling Stone, arguing that the suit is “full of false claims and unwarranted attacks.”
Hill also asserts that it “notably omits” that Michel was given an overpaid advance of $3 million, and he is still to “repay substantial loans” that she gave him in “goodwill” to pay off his legal fees.
“Last year’s tour was put together to celebrate the 25th Anniversary of the album The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill. It was being planned whether the Fugees were involved or not,” she continued. “The tour was expanded to incorporate the Fugees because I found out that Pras was in trouble and would need money to aid his legal defense.”
Significantly, Hill says she covered “most of the tour expenses” as well as Michel’s advance. “Pras has not paid back the money he was advanced, and is currently in breach of this agreement,” she wrote.
“Because my tour, band, production, and set up were already happening, the Fugees set utilised this same production. I absorbed most of the expenses myself, produced the show, put together the entire set (with Wyclef’s participation for the Fugees and Wyclef’s set),” she added. “Pras basically just had to show up and perform.”
“I was not in Pras’ life when he decided to make the unfortunate decision that led to his current legal troubles,” Hill said toward the conclusion. “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.”
What has Pras Michel said about Lauryn Hill’s response?
Michel’s legal representatives issued a statement to the same publication rejecting Hill’s response as “categorically false.”
“If she was so responsible with the management of the tour, why has she not sent an accounting to Pras?” Erica Dumas, the publicist for Michel’s attorney Robert Meloni, wrote. “Why has she refused him the ability to audit her books and records? Where did the eight figure advance she received from Mammoth go? Most importantly, why has she not addressed the fact that she has tarnished the Fugees brand with her chronic tardiness?”
“We assert that Ms. Hill misrepresented critical financial information and concealed her intent to take an excessive 60 percent share of the tour’s proceeds, leaving Mr. Michel with only 20 percent instead of the group’s customary one-third split,” aid Meloni, after mentioning Hill’s “chronic tardiness” which supposedly affected the tour.