CCR2021098-Attachment (Hassforth Claim)1
Memorandum
To: Common Council
From: Jeff Warchol, City Attorney
RE: Notice of Injury & Claim of Max Hassforth
Date: October 26, 2021
Claimants: Michael J. Hassforth $1 million
Danielle L. Hassforth $1 million
Alex Hassforth $1 million
Abbi Hassforth $1 million
Estate of Max Hassforth $250,000.00
This is a claim against the City relating to the death of Max Hassforth on May 16, 2021 when he
fell into the Muskego Dam while fishing and died of electric shock drowning due to the electrical
current running through the water as a means of keeping carp fish from entering Big Muskego Lake. The
City owns the dam and the DNR owns and maintains the electric fish barrier and equipment to operate
the same. The claim alleges negligence on the part of the City by failure to properly warn as to the
dangers present that the electric current level would be fatal as well as a failure to maintain, calibrate ,
and control the electrified fish barrier in general. The claim further alleges that the City should have
known that the circumstances existing at the time presented such a danger that a reasonable person
would consider the location “an accident waiting to happen.” The claim requests damages in the amount
of $1 million per claimant for emotional loss and suffering and $250,000.00 for economic loss and
funeral expenses of the estate.
This claim has been turned over to the City’s insurance carrier for review and investigation. The
findings of the Waukesha County Medical Examiner are that Max Hassforth died of electric shock
drowning and not that of electrocution. To date, Counsel appointed by the insurance company for the
City along with the City Attorney have investigated this matter as it relates to any negligence on the part
of the City. The consensus of Counsel and the City Attorney is that the City bears no negligence in this
matter. Other than owning the dam, the City at no time was in control of the construction, operation,
maintenance, calibration, warning indicators, restoration, or removal of the electrified fish barrier.
Instead the DNR was in complete control of all the above per a Construction and Indemnification
Agreement with the City signed in October of 1996. Therefore, negligence in this matter, if any, rests
with the DNR as opposed to the City.
Based on the above, it is the recommendation of the City Attorney to deny this claim pursuant to
the provisions of the Wisconsin Municipal Claims Statute 893.80 to limit the statute of limitations for
which the claimants may bring suit against the City.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffrey J. Warchol