49 C.F.R. § 392.2
Applicable operating rules
Every commercial motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated. However, if a regulation of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration imposes a higher standard of care than that law, ordinance or regulation, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulation must be complied with.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Stong v. Freeman Truck Line, Inc., 456 So. 2d 698 (Miss. 1984).
Stong v. Freeman Truck Line, Inc., 456 So. 2d 698 (Miss. 1984). “49 C.F.R. § 392.2 . Otherwise federal regulations require that Every motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated.”
Soo Line R.R. Co. v. Werner Enter., 825 F.3d 413 (8th Cir. 2016). “But the sudden-incapacitation defense is a defense, not a “standard of care,” and thus section 392.”
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 321 F.3d 69 (2d Cir. 2003). “42 (b)(12)(i) (prohibiting use of Schedule I drugs, amphetamines, narcotics, and other habit-forming drugs); 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 (same). . As the district court found, Hunt maintained a restrictive policy on the use of drugs for psychological conditions separate from the DRL.”
Rosenberg v. Packerland Packing Co., 370 N.E.2d 1235 (Ill. App. Ct. 1977). “” 49 C.F.R. §392.2 (1976). “No motor carrier shall schedule a run nor permit nor require the operation of any motor vehicle between points in such period of time as would necessitate the vehicle being operated at speeds greater than those prescribed by the jurisdictions in or…”
United States v. Ponce-Aldona, 579 F.3d 1218 (11th Cir. 2009). “The federal regulations state that although the states may adopt regulations governing motor carrier safety, to the extent that the federal regulations are more stringent, they prevail.”
M.T. v. Saum, 3 F. Supp. 3d 617 (W.D. Ky. 2014). “1 , requiring every motor carrier and its agents and employees to "be instructed in and comply with the rules in this part”; and 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 , requiring all commercial motor vehicles to "be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the…”
Weaver v. Chavez, 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9653 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “” ( 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 (2005).) As focused by respondents’ arguments on appeal, there are two issues presented.”
Thurston v. Ballou, 505 N.E.2d 888 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). “See 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 (1977). The regulations, promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration, require warning devices to be put out when a vehicle breaks down on the travel part or the shoulder of a highway and require a driver to carry more than merely flares.”
Carlson Auction Serv., Inc. v. Kansas Corp. Comm'n, 413 P.3d 448 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “*450 *347 Three days later the Commission sent Carlson a notice of violation of failure to register and pay UCR fees pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 (2016). Carlson was assessed a $300 fine for failure to register and pay the UCR fees.”
Conway v. Lone Star Transp., LLC. (N.D. Okla. 2020). “401, and 49 C.F.R. §§ 392.2 , 392.22, and 392.3. Dkt.”
Dustin Ray George Dittmar v. George Andrew Karels (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “0314 by failing to exercise reasonable care when operating a motor vehicle, in violation of 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 (2014) and Minn. Stat. § 169.”
Shifflett v. Routhier (W.D. Va. 2024). “11 and 49 C.F.R. § 392.2 , Couture has an affirmative duty to ensure that its drivers follow the FMCSRs.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.