Michigan Supreme Court to Hear Government Immunity Case After South Haven Beach Drowning

Michigan Supreme Court to Hear Government Immunity Case After South Haven Beach Drowning

The Michigan Supreme Court will hear arguments in a wrongful death lawsuit that could reshape how the state handles government immunity claims against municipalities for injuries occurring on public property.

The case stems from a tragic drowning incident at South Haven, where the family of 18-year-old Brandon Chambers sued the city after he drowned while swimming at South Beach on Sept. 6, 2020.

The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled on Sept. 17, 2025, that South Haven has governmental immunity, siding with the city after a man drowned while swimming at a city beach.

On Friday, April 3, 2026, the Michigan Supreme Court issued an order that it would hear the case, marking a significant step in determining whether the city can be held liable for the tragedy.

The lawsuit alleges that the city failed to provide adequate safety measures and lifeguard supervision, leading to the preventable death. The case centers on when municipal activity may expose a city to tort liability for injuries on public property.

A Pattern of Drowning Incidents

South Haven's beaches have seen a number of drowning incidents over the years, raising questions about whether the city has fulfilled its duty of care to beachgoers.

The tragedy of Brandon Chambers was not isolated. Earlier that same year, Jaedon Odunuga-Evans, 20, drowned at North Beach in the late afternoon of July 2020. In 2021, Anthony Diehl, 33, drowned while trying to rescue a 7-year-old boy, Elijah Britt, who also drowned that day.

These incidents have kept the lifeguard program at the top of South Haven officials' minds. The city has not operated a formal lifeguard program since 2001.

Lifeguard Program Returns

In November 2025, South Haven City Council approved Phase 1 of a three-phase plan to reinstate lifeguards at the city's beaches for the first time since 2001.

The plan, developed by Double Hall Solutions, a project management company the city spent $55,000 on, recommends starting with 10 lifeguards. Phase three would scale the program to 18-24 lifeguards.

The estimated cost for Phase 1 is $481,000, but the funding challenge remains significant. The city is considering various revenue sources, including increasing beach parking fees.

Currently, the city charges visitors $10 per trip or $30 per week. City Manager Kate Hosier is proposing a shift from $10 per day to $2 per hour and increasing the weekly pass rate from $30 to $50.

Hosier is proposing a shift from $10 per day to $2 per hour and increasing the weekly pass rate from $30 to $50.

The city estimates these changes could generate between $100,000 and $250,000 annually, though this would not fully cover the lifeguard program's costs.

Legal Precedent at Stake

The Michigan Supreme Court's decision in this case could set an important legal precedent regarding the scope of government immunity and the responsibility of public entities to ensure the safety of beachgoers using taxpayer-funded recreational facilities.

The case puts before the justices a dispute over when municipal activity may expose a city to tort liability for injuries on public property. This has implications far beyond South Haven's beaches.

What Comes Next

The Michigan Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case by the end of 2026. The decision will determine whether the city of South Haven can be held liable for the drowning death or if government immunity protects the municipality from such lawsuits.

The ruling could affect dozens of Michigan municipalities that operate public beaches, parks, and recreational facilities. It may reshape how cities approach public safety funding and the deployment of lifeguards and other safety personnel at public venues.

For now, the Michigan Supreme Court will weigh the arguments on both sides of this complex legal question, with the outcome potentially changing how Michigan handles claims of government liability for injuries on public property.