Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 14 — · Chapter 248 — Vehicle Highway Use
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-241 (2026)

Turns

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Both the approach for a right turn and a right turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway.

(b) At any intersection where traffic is permitted to move in both directions on each highway entering the intersection, an approach for a left turn shall be made in that portion of the right half of the highway nearest the center line thereof and by passing to the right of such center line where it enters the intersection, and after entering the intersection the left turn shall be made so as to leave the intersection to the right of the center line of the highway being entered.

(c) At any intersection where traffic is restricted to one direction on one or more of the highways, the driver of a vehicle intending to turn left shall approach the intersection in the extreme left-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the direction of travel of such vehicle, and after entering the intersection the left turn shall be made so as to leave the intersection, as nearly as practicable, in the left-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in such direction upon the highway being entered.

(d) “Deceleration lane” means an added outside lane of a highway laned for traffic which immediately precedes an exit road from such highway, and “acceleration lane” means an added outside lane of a highway laned for traffic which immediately follows an entrance road into such highway. Where deceleration and acceleration lanes exist, all turns made to leave or enter the highway shall be made from or into such lanes.

(e) On any state highway the Office of the State Traffic Administration, and, on highways under their jurisdiction, local traffic authorities, may cause rotaries or roundabouts, signs or other devices conforming to the manual on uniform traffic control devices to be placed within or adjacent to intersections and thereby direct that a different course from that specified in this section be traveled by vehicles turning at an intersection, and when rotaries or roundabouts, signs or other devices are so placed, no driver shall turn a vehicle otherwise than as directed thereby.

(f) Violation of any of the provisions of this section shall be an infraction.

(1955, S. 1393d; February, 1965, P.A. 448, S. 24; P.A. 75-577, S. 85, 126; P.A. 05-210, S. 26; P.A. 12-132, S. 20.)

History: 1965 act deleted reference to state aid highway and added references to local traffic authorities and the manual on uniform traffic control devices in Subsec. (e); P.A. 75-577 added Subsec. (f); P.A. 05-210 amended Subsec. (e) by substituting “rotaries or roundabouts” for “rotary traffic islands”, effective July 1, 2005; P.A. 12-132 amended Subsec. (e) by replacing “State Traffic Commission” with “Office of the State Traffic Administration”, effective July 1, 2012.

See Sec. 14-111g re operator's retraining program.

See Sec. 14-295 re assessment of double or treble damages.

Annotations to former section:

Mere signal by traffic officer to proceed does not excuse driver turning rapidly to left before reaching center of intersection; effect of established custom to make short turn to left at the point. 98 C. 75. Negligence in passing to left of center of intersection when making left turn. 108 C. 185. Cited. 111 C. 729. Judgment showing defendant had pleaded guilty to information charging simply a violation of statute is not admissible as admission of negligence. 114 C. 388. Cited. Id., 404; 115 C. 296. Under former statute, impracticability of operation of bus to right of center of intersection was not a justification. Id., 466. Whether failure to slow down or to signal or to do both constitutes violation depends on what reasonable care requires. 116 C. 578. Cited. 117 C. 522. Mere intention to pass to left of center is not a violation. Id., 609, 610. Cited. 118 C. 126. Contributory negligence in failing to keep to right of center while passing vehicle at intersection. 122 C. 6. What constitutes intersection when highway bounds are curved. Id., 202, see also 125 C. 553. Bicycle cutting corner. 122 C. 447; Id., 611. No exception in case of minor. Id., 448. Pedestrian is entitled to assume that vehicle will pass to right of center of intersection. 124 C. 692. Passing to left of intersection is negligence per se. 125 C. 159. Methods for determining center of highway and of dirt road. 126 C. 478. Recovery not denied where plaintiff's failure to keep to right of center of intersection was not proximate cause of collision. 130 C. 176, 177. Under former statute, requirement of keeping to right of center of intersection applied on one-way street. 133 C. 370. “Sign” at intersection includes lines on pavement for direction of traffic. Id., 453. Where plaintiff claimed defendant turned to left before reaching intersection, failure of court to charge that person turning to left should keep to right of center of intersection was harmful error. 134 C. 194. Violation is negligence per se but charge held adequate which stated that statute required a certain course of action. 146 C. 10. Cited. 147 C. 638; 149 C. 371. Where, in special defense of contributory negligence, defendant's alleged failure to use care of reasonably prudent person, to keep proper lookout and to operate automobile in such manner as to prevent collision, reference by court in its charge to statute was proper. Id., 386. Cited. 150 C. 355; 154 C. 615; 155 C. 409; 163 C. 146.

Cited. 14 CS 232.

Driver making right turn 7 feet from curb held to have exercised due care in civil case. 2 Conn. Cir. Ct. 269. Cited. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 695.

Annotations to present section:

Cited. 206 C. 608.

Cited. 4 CA 451.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1962–2022 · leading case: Daley v. Kashmanian, 280 A.3d 68 (Conn. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Daley v. Kashmanian, 280 A.3d 68 (Conn. 2022). · cites it 10× “Compare General Statutes § 14-234 (a) (‘‘[w]hen [no passing] signs or markings are in place and clearly visible to an ordinarily observant person, each driver of a vehicle shall obey the directions thereof’’), General Statutes § 14-241 (b) (‘‘[a]t any intersection where traffic…”
State v. Jenkins, 934 A.2d 281 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “[2] General Statutes § 14-242(a) provides: "No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in a proper position on the highway as required by section 14-241, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct…”
Cole v. New Haven, 253 A.3d 476 (Conn. 2020). “’’ 8 General Statutes § 14-242 provides in relevant part: ‘‘(a) No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in a proper position on the highway as required by section 14-241, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway or otherwise turn a…”
VIP OF BERLIN, LLC v. Town of Berlin, 951 A.2d 714 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2008). · cites it 3× “I BACKGROUND In its amended complaint, the plaintiff, VIP of Berlin, LLC, seeks a declaratory judgment to determine whether the locational restrictions found in § 14-291 of article six of the Berlin municipal code, the sexually oriented business ordinance (ordinance), §§ 14-241…”
Horenian v. Washington, 15 A.3d 1194 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). “No person shall so *95 turn any vehicle without giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in section 14-244.”
McDonald v. Connecticut Co., 193 A.2d 490 (Conn. 1963). · cites it 2× “Under the circumstances, the decedent was not entitled to claim the benefit of the right of way provision of the statute.”
Michaud v. Gagne, 232 A.2d 326 (Conn. 1967). “Second, since the defendant was approaching the intersection intending to make a left turn into Hyde Road, §§ 14-241 (b), 14-242 (a), 14-242 (b), 14-244 and 14-246 of the General Statutes govern the rights and obligations of the operators.”
State v. Jones-Richards, 855 A.2d 979 (Conn. 2004). “” General Statutes § 14-242 (a) provides: “No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in a proper position on the highway as required by section 14-241, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct…”
Ramonas v. Zucker, 302 A.2d 242 (Conn. 1972). · cites it 3× “It also explained the application of §14-241 concerning an approach for a left turn; § 14-244, also relating to signals; and § 14-246, regarding the right-of-way of a driver within an intersection intending to turn to the left.”
Domenick v. Wilbert Burial Vault Co., 180 A.2d 290 (Conn. 1962). · cites it 2× “In a special defense of contributory negligence, the defendants alleged that Patricia failed to use the care of a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances, failed to keep a proper lookout and “failed to operate the .”
Fasanelli v. Terzo, 189 A.2d 500 (Conn. 1963). “defendant to turn to the right, and to eliminate from the jury’s consideration the practicability of the defendant’s pulling over to his right to allow the plaintiff to pass on his left—if the jury believed the claim of the defendant that he was already in the left westbound…”
Marcio v. Helm's Express, Inc., 228 A.2d 128 (Conn. 1967). · cites it 2× “The defendants also offered evidence that at no time prior to the collision did the plaintiff give a signal of any kind which would indicate an intention to make a left turn.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-241(2)(j): 1 case
VIP OF BERLIN, LLC v. Town of Berlin, 951 A.2d 714 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2008). “I BACKGROUND In its amended complaint, the plaintiff, VIP of Berlin, LLC, seeks a declaratory judgment to determine whether the locational restrictions found in § 14-291 of article six of the Berlin municipal code, the sexually oriented business ordinance (ordinance), §§ 14-241…”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-241(4): 1 case
VIP OF BERLIN, LLC v. Town of Berlin, 951 A.2d 714 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2008). “I BACKGROUND In its amended complaint, the plaintiff, VIP of Berlin, LLC, seeks a declaratory judgment to determine whether the locational restrictions found in § 14-291 of article six of the Berlin municipal code, the sexually oriented business ordinance (ordinance), §§ 14-241…”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-241(b): 1 case
Fasanelli v. Terzo, 189 A.2d 500 (Conn. 1963). “defendant to turn to the right, and to eliminate from the jury’s consideration the practicability of the defendant’s pulling over to his right to allow the plaintiff to pass on his left—if the jury believed the claim of the defendant that he was already in the left westbound…”
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.