Dropped From the Lawsuit: What "With Prejudice" Means in the Cornell Case
A former Cornell fraternity president was dropped from the Jane Doe lawsuit. Here is how a defendant leaves a New York case, what "with prejudice" means, and how campus dismissals differ.
October 20, 2026 · 3 min read
By Jocelyn C. Stewart
A former president of Cornell's Chi Phi chapter is out of the Jane Doe civil lawsuit. A filing on Oct. 20 ended the claims against him. If you are ever named in a lawsuit like this one, here is what that kind of exit means, and what it does not.
What happened. The Cornell Daily Sun and CNY Central both report that a court filing on Tuesday removed the former chapter president as a defendant in the New York state court case. TMZ reports that all parties agreed to drop him. The suit alleges a 2024 gang rape at the fraternity house. Those are allegations. No court has decided them.
What the claim against him was. He was not accused of assault. The Sun and CNY Central both describe the claim against him as a failure to use reasonable care, or to supervise and protect, inside the house. TMZ, too, reports he was not one of the seven men accused.
Why he was dropped. Here the accounts differ. ABC News reports he had been mistakenly identified as the chapter president at the time of the alleged attack. CNY Central and TMZ give no reason. His lawyer called it the "right outcome," according to the Sun, which cites ABC.
Can he be sued again? CNY Central reports that Doe's lawyers asked that the claims be discontinued with prejudice, which closes them for good. TMZ reports he cannot be added back. The Sun and ABC do not describe the terms.
What it does not do. Dropping one defendant does not end the case. CNY Central reports the filing leaves Doe's claims against Cornell, its affiliated organizations and the men accused of assault in place.