Wisconsin Circuit Court Reverses Shorewood Beach Access Trespass Conviction, Potentially Expanding Public Access Rights Along Lake Michigan

A decision by the Milwaukee County Circuit Court rendered on September 3 may have significant implications for owners of waterfront property along Wisconsin's shoreline. In a closely watched case involving public access to Lake Michigan beaches, the court reversed a Shorewood Municipal Court trespass conviction and held that an individual could not be penalized for walking along the shoreline below the ordinary high-water mark.  The ruling appears to recognize that Wisconsin's Public Trust Doctrine may provide broader public access rights along Great Lakes shorelines than some local governments and waterfront property owners have previously asserted.

The case arose after a Shorewood resident, Paul Florsheim, received a trespass citation for walking along the shoreline near Atwater Beach in July 2025. The resident challenged the citation, arguing that Wisconsin's Public Trust Doctrine grants members of the public the right to walk along the beach between the water's edge and the ordinary high-water mark. The Shorewood Municipal Court initially rejected that argument and upheld the citation.

The dispute centers on the scope of Wisconsin's Public Trust Doctrine, a constitutional doctrine that preserves public rights in navigable waters and the lands beneath those waters. Under Wisconsin law, owners of property adjoining a lake, river, or other navigable waterway possess certain "riparian rights" associated with their waterfront ownership. These rights generally include the ability to access the water, make reasonable use of it, and enjoy the adjacent shoreline. However, Wisconsin courts have long recognized that riparian rights are subject to the public's rights under the Public Trust Doctrine. When a conflict arises between private riparian interests and the public's rights in navigable waters, Wisconsin courts have generally held that the public's rights take precedence.

Florsheim argued that the doctrine extends beyond mere use of the water itself and includes the right to walk along the shoreline below the ordinary high-water mark. The Village of Shorewood, by contrast, relied heavily on Doemel v. Jantz, a 1923 Wisconsin Supreme Court case involving Lake Winnebago, to argue that adjacent property owners retain exclusive control over the beach area down to the water's edge.

Specifically, the circuit court differentiated Doemel because it involved a dispute between a riparian landowner and an alleged trespasser, where the landowner sought to vindicate his own private property and riparian rights. The central issue was whether the alleged trespass infringed the riparian owner's exclusive rights in the shore area between the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) and the water. By contrast, the present case involved a municipality enforcing a trespass ordinance, not a riparian owner asserting private property rights. The court reasoned that because no riparian owner was a party, there was no need to balance riparian rights against public rights under the Public Trust Doctrine. Instead, the question here centered on whether the Village had authority to prohibit conduct that the court viewed as protected by the Public Trust Doctrine. The circuit court further characterized Doemel as addressing a meandered inland lake, where fluctuating water levels create a narrow and changing area between the water's edge and the ordinary high-water mark. In that context, the Doemel court recognized periods when the riparian owner's rights became dominant as waters receded. The difference in facts at issue support potential differing legal standards applicable to Great Lakes shorelines and inland lakes in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin courts have not definitively resolved the extent of public walking rights along Great Lakes beaches below the ordinary high-water mark. As a result, the decision could become an important precedent in future disputes involving:

• Lake Michigan and Lake Superior waterfront properties;
• Public beach access claims;
• Trespass enforcement by municipalities and private landowners;
• Determinations of the ordinary high-water mark; and
• Shoreline development and management practices.

The issue has become increasingly important as conflicts over shoreline access have emerged in multiple Wisconsin communities, including areas near Ozaukee County's Lion's Den Gorge Nature Preserve.

Owners of Great Lakes waterfront property should be aware that this decision may strengthen arguments that members of the public have the right to traverse portions of the shoreline even where adjacent upland property is privately owned.

Until Wisconsin appellate courts provide additional guidance, waterfront owners should exercise caution before attempting to exclude members of the public from areas below the ordinary high-water mark. Property owners should also review existing signage, enforcement policies, and development plans to ensure they are consistent with evolving interpretations of public access rights.

Developers, municipalities, and public agencies involved in shoreline projects should anticipate increased scrutiny regarding public access and shoreline use. Projects involving coastal infrastructure, shoreline stabilization, public pathways, or waterfront redevelopment may need to account for potential public access rights below the ordinary high-water mark.

Municipalities may also wish to evaluate local enforcement practices and ordinances governing shoreline access in light of the court's ruling.

It remains unclear whether the Village of Shorewood will appeal the decision. If an appeal is pursued, Wisconsin appellate courts may have an opportunity to provide long-awaited clarification regarding the extent of public rights along Wisconsin's Great Lakes shorelines. For now, the decision represents an important development in Wisconsin waterfront property law and may signal a broader judicial recognition of public access rights along the Great Lakes shoreline.

If you have questions regarding Wisconsin waterfront property rights, public trust doctrine issues, shoreline development, easements, or access disputes, please contact Michael Best & Friedrich LLP.