Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-251 (2026)

Parking vehicles

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) No vehicle shall be permitted to remain stationary within ten feet of any fire hydrant, or upon the traveled portion of any highway except upon the right-hand side of such highway in the direction in which such vehicle is headed; and, if such highway is curbed, such vehicle shall be so placed that its right-hand wheels, when stationary, shall, when safety will permit, be within a distance of twelve inches from the curb, except if a bikeway, as defined in section 13a-153f, or such bikeway's buffer area, as described in the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, is in place between the parking lane and the curb, such vehicle shall be so placed that its right-hand wheels, when stationary, shall, when safety will permit, be within a distance of twelve inches from the edge of such bikeway or buffer area.

(b) No vehicle shall be permitted to remain parked within twenty-five feet of an intersection or an approach to a marked crosswalk, except (1) within ten feet of such intersection or marked crosswalk if such intersection or marked crosswalk has a curb extension treatment with a width equal to or greater than the width of the parking lane, or (2) if there is an available parking space that was established on or before October 1, 2022. No vehicle shall be permitted to remain parked within twenty-five feet of a stop sign caused to be erected by the traffic authority in accordance with the provisions of section 14-301, except where permitted by the traffic authority of the city of New Haven at the intersection of one-way streets located in and comprised entirely of highways under the jurisdiction of the city of New Haven.

(c) No vehicle shall be permitted to remain stationary upon the traveled portion of any highway at any curve or turn or at the top of any grade where a clear view of such vehicle may not be had from a distance of at least one hundred fifty feet in either direction. The Commissioner of Transportation may post signs upon any highway at any place where the keeping of a vehicle stationary is dangerous to traffic, and the keeping of any vehicle stationary contrary to the directions of such signs shall be a violation of this section. No vehicle shall be permitted to remain stationary upon the traveled portion of any highway within fifty feet of the point where another vehicle, which had previously stopped, continues to remain stationary on the opposite side of the traveled portion of the same highway. No vehicle shall be permitted to remain stationary within the limits of a public highway in such a manner as to constitute a traffic hazard or obstruct the free movement of traffic thereon, provided a vehicle which has become disabled to such an extent that it is impossible or impracticable to remove it may be permitted to so remain for a reasonable time for the purpose of making repairs thereto or of obtaining sufficient assistance to remove it.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to emergency vehicles and to maintenance vehicles displaying flashing lights or to prohibit a vehicle from stopping, or being held stationary by any officer, in an emergency to avoid accident or to give a right-of-way to any vehicle or pedestrian as provided in this chapter, or from stopping on any highway within the limits of an incorporated city, town or borough where the parking of vehicles is regulated by local ordinances.

(e) Violation of any provision of this section shall be an infraction.

(1949 Rev., S. 2509; 1959, P.A. 283, S. 3; 1969, P.A. 768, S. 142; P.A. 75-577, S. 96, 126; P.A. 15-41, S. 2; P.A. 16-55, S. 18; P.A. 17-230, S. 16; P.A. 18-167, S. 6; P.A. 22-40, S. 1.)

History: 1959 act excepted emergency vehicles and maintenance vehicles displaying flashing lights from provisions of section; 1969 act replaced highway commissioner with commissioner of transportation; P.A. 75-577 made violation of provisions an infraction; P.A. 15-41 added provision re parking next to a bikeway and made a technical change, effective July 1, 2015; P.A. 16-55 made a technical change, effective May 31, 2016; P.A. 17-230 added provisions re exemptions for parked vehicles at intersections with curb extension treatments in New Haven and at stop signs where permitted by the traffic authority at one-way streets in New Haven; P.A. 18-167 added “and comprised entirely of highways under the jurisdiction of” re exemptions for parked vehicles in New Haven, effective June 14, 2018; P.A. 22-40 added Subsec. designators (a) to (e), amended Subsec. (b) to add “an approach to”, designate existing provision as Subdiv. (1) and added in same references to marked crosswalk, delete provision re exception for parked vehicles at intersections with curb extension treatments in New Haven and add Subdiv. (2) re parking space established on or before October 1, 2022.

See Sec. 14-107 re liability of owner, operator or lessee of vehicle.

See Sec. 14-307 re parking restrictions.

Shoulder is not part of “traveled portion” of highway. 114 C. 336; Id., 651; 127 C. 340. Statute does not authorize parking on traveled portion without other precautions, if necessary, than those expressly required by it. 116 C. 574. Cited. 121 C. 439. What constitutes traveled portion is question of fact. 127 C. 341. Is not repealed by definition of “parked vehicle” in Sec. 14-1 but is intended to be read with it. 142 C. 592. Violation of section constitutes negligence as a matter of law; but for such negligence to be actionable, it must be proven to have been a proximate cause of decedent's injury. 153 C. 64. Cited. 162 C. 462; 170 C. 74; 174 C. 275.

Cited. 17 CA 697. Statute supersedes local parking ordinance that does not address specific provisions of statute. 59 CA 434. City cannot enact ordinance prohibiting diagonal parking outside its limits on the public highway because of section; it can only enact legislation with respect to property within its legitimate control. 76 CA 222.

Cited. 23 CS 211. Use of word “impracticable” as well as “impossible” in section implies other factors besides mechanical condition of car are involved in deciding whether disabled car exception in section applies; the word “disabled” in section which prohibits stationary vehicles on highways except those which are disabled must be construed as applying not only to vehicles which cannot be moved under their own power but also to those which cannot be removed with reasonable safety and without creating danger greater than that which exists from their being stationary. 33 CS 49. Court must find facts sufficient to support conclusion that plaintiff was negligent because of his violation of statute, including facts negating the application of any statutory exceptions. 37 CS 574.

Cited. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 217.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 22 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1962–2025 · leading case: Busko v. DeFilippo, 294 A.2d 510 (Conn. 1972).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Busko v. DeFilippo, 294 A.2d 510 (Conn. 1972). · cites it 41× “*465 The defendant claims that the plaintiff's headlights were lighted; that she could see between 400 to 500 feet in front of her; that there was 335 feet of unobstructed, straight road north of the defendant's parked vehicle; that the plaintiff admitted traveling thirty-five…”

Allison v. Manetta, 933 A.2d 1197 (Conn. 2007). · cites it 17× “2-556 3 and because the plaintiff had presented no expert testimony regarding the applicable standard of care for a state employee parking a truck on the roadway while addressing a hazardous road condition; (3) denied the defendant’s request to instruct the jury that maintenance…”

Raymond v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 820 A.2d 275 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 7× “We turn next to the plaintiffs’ argument that unless pattern parking is permitted by local ordinances, General Statutes § 14-251 prohibits diagonal vehicular parking on any public highway in the state.”

Marchand v. Simonson, 16 F. Supp. 3d 97 (D. Conn. 2014). · cites it 10× “Whether Simonson Had Probable Cause to Arrest Marchand Defendants argue that Simonson had probable cause to arrest Marchand for (1) violation of C.G.S. § 14-251, for parking on the left-hand side of the road; (2) violation of C.”

Galligan v. Blais, 364 A.2d 164 (Conn. 1976). · cites it 12× “The jury returned a verdict for the defendant on each count, and, from the judgment rendered, the plaintiffs have appealed to this court.”

State v. Jones, 966 A.2d 277 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 8× “Parking more than one foot from the curbing on a public road is an infraction under General Statutes § 14-251 7 and Stratford Town Ordinances § 203-8.”

Hicks v. State, 948 A.2d 982 (Conn. 2008). · cites it 3× “While the defendant’s appeal was pending, this court decided a case in which we rejected that same claim with respect to §§ 14-251 and 14-290. See Allison v. Manetta, 284 Conn.”

State v. Smith, 181 A.3d 118 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “hicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug in violation of General Statutes § 14-227a(a)(1), operating a motor vehicle while having an elevated blood alcohol content in violation of § 14-227a(a)(2), possession of a small amount of a cannabis-type…”

State v. Gordon, 854 A.2d 74 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “In denying the defendant’s motion to suppress, the court specifically found that the defendant was parked illegally in violation of General Statutes § 14-251 when the officers approached his vehicle and concluded that that violation provided the officers with a reasonable and…”

Himmelstein v. Town of Windsor, 974 A.2d 820 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 2× “11 Specifically, the defendant argued that the radar trailer was a legally registered motor vehicle and that pursuant to General Statutes § 14-251, it was permissible to park it on the right side of the roadway.”

State v. Coscuna, 757 A.2d 659 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 26× “The defendant, Arthur Coscuna, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a trial to the court, of improper parking in violation of General Statutes § 14-251 1 and failure to signal in violation of *436 General Statutes § 14-244.”

Messina v. Iannucci, 386 A.2d 241 (Conn. 1978). · cites it 3× “Quoting relevant portions of General Statutes § 14-251 1 to the jury, the court said “lane” and “wheel” instead of “side” and “wheels.”

Show all 22 citing cases →

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.