When any highway has been divided into two roadways by leaving an intervening space or by a physical barrier or clearly indicated dividing section, each vehicle shall be driven only upon the right-hand roadway and no vehicle shall be driven over or across any such dividing space, barrier or section, except through an opening or at a crossover or intersection established by public authority. Violation of any provision of this section shall be an infraction.
(1955, S. 1389d; P.A. 75-577, S. 80, 126.)
History: P.A. 75-577 stated that violation of provisions is an infraction.
See Sec. 14-111g re operator's retraining program.
See Sec. 14-295 re assessment of double or treble damages.
To require affirmative proof of an intent to commit the act prohibited would import into statute a requirement never contemplated by the legislature; where the course of a motor vehicle is contrary to statute, it is usually a permissible inference that the operator of the vehicle was the responsible agent in causing it to take that course. 150 C. 35. Cited. 161 C. 204; 191 C. 266; 206 C. 608; 234 C. 660.
Cited. 1 CA 517; 4 CA 451.
An esplanade dividing northbound and southbound roadways is sufficient “intervening space”; knowledge or intention forms no element of the offense; the act alone, irrespective of its motive, constitutes the crime. 23 CS 197. Cited. 38 CS 675.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases, 1962–2010 · leading case:
Donner v. Kearse, 662 A.2d 1269 (Conn. 1995).
Donner v. Kearse, 662 A.2d 1269 (Conn. 1995).
· cites it 2× “First, the court explained that the defendant might have violated General Statutes § 14-237 by driving over a median strip.”
Berchtold v. Maggi, 464 A.2d 1 (Conn. 1983).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 14-237 prohibits any vehicle from crossing any divided highway “except through an opening or at a crossover or intersection established by public authority.”
O'Donnell v. Feneque, 991 A.2d 643 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 3× “On appeal, the defendant argued that “the jury should have been instructed that [it] could not find that he was violating the statute without evidence that he took some affirmative action which caused the vehicle to take the course which it did.”
State v. Zyko, 473 A.2d 337 (Conn. App. Ct. 1984).
· cites it 6× “After a trial by the court the defendant was found guilty of crossing a median divider on Route 52 in violation of General Statutes § 14-237 1 and fined $55.”
State v. Hackett, 804 A.2d 225 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 2× “ay, limited access highway); General Statutes § 14-225 (public street or highway, parking area for ten or more cars, school property); General Statutes § 14-227a (public highway, road of specially chartered municipal association or district, parking area for ten or more cars,…”
Toomey v. Danaher, 286 A.2d 293 (Conn. 1971).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 14-237. A second statute concerns the prohibition against changing lanes on a multilane highway before ascertaining that such a movement can be made safely.”
Danzell v. Smith, 184 A.2d 53 (Conn. 1962).
· cites it 3× “The court, in its instructions, read to the jury the provisions of § 1389d of the 1955 Cumulative Supplement (General Statutes *38 § 14-237). 1 The court stated that the Wilbur Cross Parkway, at the point of the accident, was a divided highway, and it pointed out that the…”
State v. Dionne, 38 Conn. Supp. 675 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1983).
“On August 12,1981, the defendant was arrested and charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes § 14-227a and with driving in the wrong lane of a limited access highway in violation of § 14-237.…”
State v. Calhoun, 1 Conn. Cir. Ct. 174 (Conn. App. Ct. 1962).
· cites it 2× “The alleged violation of § 14-237 of the General Statutes occurred at about noon on June 14, 1961, in the town of Newington on route 5, which was divided into two roadways by an esplanade.”
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.