Myrtle Beach lifeguard provider says city pact protects from multi-million dollar payout

A Myrtle Beach lifeguard provider deemed civilly responsible for a 2018 drowning claims in new court filings that it should be treated as an arm of the city and protected from a multi-million dollar judgment — a legal strategy opposing lawyers called ‘novel.’

Last month, a jury ordered Lack’s Beach Service to pay $20.7 million in damages to the estate of 41-year-old Zerihun Wolde, who was caught in a rip current while on vacation on an oceanfront section supposed to be monitored by company-provided lifeguards.

Lack’s officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

But in newly filed court motions, attorneys say Lack’s contract with the city — a unique arrangement that allows the company to profit from equipment rentals in exchange for providing lifeguards — limits its liability to $300,000 under state governmental immunity laws.

In an Aug. 8 filing, the company’s attorney, Joseph Thompson, said that because Lack’s Beach Service has a franchise agreement through 2025, the city’s financial protections include it — a theory known an “derivative sovereign immunity.

Abel’s attorneys called the strategy ‘novel’ in response.

“Lack’s last ditch effort to drastically limits its liability — and effectively avoid accountability ... fails both legally and procedurally,” attorney Chris Pracht said in an Aug. 22 motion.

Pracht is part of the legal team that representing Wolde’s fiance Mesawaet Abel and their four children,

Myrtle Beach spokesman Mark Kruea said the city doesn’t comment on pending litigation. Lack’s Beach Service is one of two companies with city franchise agreements for “dual role” life guarding. The other is John’s Beach Service.

If the penalty against Lack’s isn’t reduced, a new trial should be conducted based on prejudicial and faulty evidence offered to the original jury, Thompson said.

“The jury’s passion, prejudice and sympathy infected the entire deliberations and therefore the Court should grant a new trial,” Thompson wrote in an Aug. 8 motion.

A centerpiece of the case against Lack’s was its inability to win certification from the U.S. Lifesaving Association, the country’s leading aquatic safety group. Officials said the continued use of a dual role system is inherently dangerous and outside of industry standards.

Thompson said those facts were irrelevant and misled the jury.

“First and foremost, the State of South Carolina does not require any lifeguarding service, public or private, on any coastal beach to be certified by any association or organization, much less the USLA,” Thompson wrote.

The city’s pact with Lack’s Beach Service also didn’t require it to receive agency certification, making it “grossly prejudicial” to the jury by including the fact at trial, his motion states.

Pracht dismissed the claims and said the jury’s decision should be upheld.

“This is a tragic and heartbreaking case of the preventable loss of a beloved father. As shocking and horrific as the loss of Mr. Wolde was, Lack’s utter lack of slight care in operating its beach safety business and complete indifference to the safety and welfare of beachgoers like Mr. Wolde is perhaps even more shocking and horrific,” he wrote in an Aug. 22 motion.