49 C.F.R. § 396.7
Unsafe operations forbidden
(a) General. A motor vehicle shall not be operated in such a condition as to likely cause an accident or a breakdown of the vehicle.
(b) Exemption. Any motor vehicle discovered to be in an unsafe condition while being operated on the highway may be continued in operation only to the nearest place where repairs can safely be effected. Such operation shall be conducted only if it is less hazardous to the public than to permit the vehicle to remain on the highway.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1983–2024 · leading case: Inman v. Howe Freightways, Inc.
Inman v. Howe Freightways, Inc. (2019)
“7(a) of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) ( 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (a) (2011) ). The court also affirmed the deemed admitted allegations from the first sanctions order concerning the safety training.”
Kimberly Burgess v. Paducah Area Transit Authority (2010)
“, 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (unsafe motor vehicle operation forbidden), K.”
Yellow Freight Systems, Inc. v. Robert B. Reich, Secretary of Labor, and John A. Thom (1994)
“According to Thom, the “when” clause applied to his conduct because continued operation of Unit 76380 on March 30 would have violated Department of Transportation regulation, 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 . 4 Thom argued that the “because” clause also protected his refusal because his…”
Inman v. Howe Freightways, Inc. (2019)
“7(a) of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) ( 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (a) (2011)). The court also affirmed the deemed admitted allegations from the first sanctions order concerning the safety training.”
Brian Casey v. Ronald Smith (2014)
“3 (a), which requires all parts and accessories to be in a safe and proper operating condition, and 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (a), which prohibits commercial motor vehicles from being operated in a condition likely to cause an accident or breakdown.”
Kluender v. Mattea (1983)
“Those regulations, 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (1978), provided that “every driver shall prepare such a report in writing at the completion of his day’s work or tour of duty, which report shall list any defect or deficiency of the motor vehicle discovered by said driver or reported to him…”
Casey v. Smith (2013)
“3 (a)(1), which requires that "[p]arts and accessories shall be in safe and proper operating condition at all times[,]" and 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (a), which prohibits operation of a vehicle "in such condition as to likely cause an accident or breakdown of the vehicle.”
Evans v. Aloisio (2021)
“Aloisio, on the other hand, intends to introduce expert testimony by accident reconstructionist Douglas Heard that Aloisio complied with 49 CFR 396.7, a FMCSR which requires that “[a] motor vehicle shall not be operated in such a condition as to likely cause an accident 1 Refers…”
James R Bradley Jr v. Prudential Security Inc (2019)
“3; 49 CFR 396.7; 49 CFR 396.11; 49 CFR 396.13; Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1963, 1963 PA 181 ; MCL 480.”
Poe v. Majeed (2024)
“The only statute Plaintiff points to Defendant violating is 49 CFR § 396.7 . (Id.). 49 CFR § 396.7 is a federal regulation which states: “A motor vehicle shall not be operated in such a condition as to likely cause an accident or a breakdown of the vehicle.”
Mullins v. Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC (2021)
“3 (a)(1), and 49 C.F.R. § 396.7 (a). The case was removed to this Court.”
Douglas Melrose v. Ricky Warner (2016)
“3 (improper inspection), 49 CFR 396.7 (unsafe operations), 49 CFR 396.”
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.