Full-Service Law Firm solving complex challenges through bold thinking, precise execution, and shared purpose.

Full Service Law Firm | Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

Specializing in the Intersection of Business &amp; Government

Meet our team of trusted advisors, strategic thinkers, and community builders dedicated to client success.

Learn about our full-service legal and business solutions, designed to address complex challenges for leading organizations across industries.

Access thought leadership, news, and resources to stay informed about the latest trends, legal developments, and industry innovations.

Discover how partnership, bold thinking, and precise execution drive results for clients nationwide.

Explore how our national reach and local expertise support clients across the United States and beyond.

Grow at a firm designed to bring out your best.

On January 28, 2026, the Shorewood Municipal Court in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin issued a decision finding Paul Florsheim guilty of trespassing for repeatedly walking along the dry sand portion of a privately owned stretch of shoreline north of Atwater Beach. In doing so, the court determined that Wisconsin’s Public Trust Doctrine, codified as part of the Wisconsin Constitution and under which all navigable waters in Wisconsin are owned in common by the public and the State holds them in trust for the benefit of all citizens, does not grant the public a right to walk on exposed lakeshore land between the ordinary high‑water mark and the water’s edge. The court largely grounded its decision in precedent set by the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s 1923 case of Doemel v. Jantz, which held that private lakeshore owners have exclusive control over the exposed land between the ordinary high‑water mark and the water’s edge, meaning the public’s rights apply only in the water itself (such as boating, fishing, and swimming). The Wisconsin Supreme Court in Diana Shooting Club v. Husting defined the ordinary high-water mark as “the point on the bank or shore up to which the presence and action of the water is so continuous as to leave a distinct mark either by erosion, destruction or terrestrial vegetation or other easily recognized characteristic.” The Shorewood Municipal Court’s decision provides that such precedent remains binding unless and until the Wisconsin Supreme Court rules otherwise. Although states such as Michigan and Indiana recognize a public right to walk Great Lakes beaches below the high‑water mark, Wisconsin has not yet adopted that view.

core/paragraph

This decision is noteworthy for both owners of lakeside property as well as members of the public who seek to enjoy the lakeshore. Under current interpretation of the law, public rights attach to the water itself, and not to the exposed shoreline when lake levels recede. The Shorewood Municipal Court noted that although Wisconsin courts have expanded the Public Trust Doctrine to protect recreation, scenic beauty, and various water‑based public uses, no Wisconsin case yet extended those rights onto the landward side of the waterline. Without such authority, the court held that the Public Trust Doctrine did not protect Florsheim’s access, rendering Florsheim guilty for trespass.

The Shorewood Municipal Court’s decision acknowledged that the Wisconsin Supreme Court could revisit Doemel, particularly given evolving approaches in Michigan and Indiana, but held that lower courts cannot modify or expand existing precedent. As a result, any change in shoreline‑access rights must come from Wisconsin’s appellate courts, not local tribunals or agency guidance.

Those who own lakeside property may therefore continue to rely on existing law recognizing their exclusive control, as private landowners, over the exposed shoreland between the ordinary high-water mark and the water’s edge, while members of the public should assume that walking above the water’s edge remains subject to trespass enforcement.

Florsheim has until February 17, 2026, to appeal the ruling to Milwaukee County Circuit Court. That appeal, if filed, may provide the next step toward further clarification of Wisconsin’s Public Trust Doctrine.

Michael Best will continue to monitor developments with this case, and is available to advise property owners, municipalities, and other stakeholders navigating Wisconsin’s Public Trust Doctrine relative to beachfront‑access issues.

Modern glass office buildings reflecting a colorful sunset sky, showcasing contemporary urban architecture in a city skyline.

Paul R. Jonas

Michelle Wagner Ebben

Jonathan T. Luljak

Thomas Kozlovsky

Real Estate

Wisconsin Municipal Court Ruling Reinforces Limits of Public Beach Access Under Public Trust Doctrine

Drafting Under Fire: Cases Shaping IP Licensing and Enforcement Rights

Five Real Estate Trends Organizations Need to Know Right Now

DC Judge Vacates IRS Limitation on Wind, Solar Tax Credits, But Uncertainty for Developers Remains

Lessons from the Tax Court: Contemporaneous Written Acknowledgments from Nonprofits to Donors – Strict Compliance Required, Substantial Compliance Not Enough.

Wisconsin Municipal Court Ruling Reinforces Limits of Public Beach Access Under Public Trust Doctrine

Related People

Related Capabilities

You may also be interested in these

Drafting Under Fire: Cases Shaping IP Licensing and Enforcement Rights

Five Real Estate Trends Organizations Need to Know Right Now

DC Judge Vacates IRS Limitation on Wind, Solar Tax Credits, But Uncertainty for Developers Remains

Related People

Related Capabilities

You may also be interested in these

Drafting Under Fire: Cases Shaping IP Licensing and Enforcement Rights

Five Real Estate Trends Organizations Need to Know Right Now

DC Judge Vacates IRS Limitation on Wind, Solar Tax Credits, But Uncertainty for Developers Remains

Slide Menu

Slide Search