Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448It is unlawful for the owner or any other person employing or otherwise directing the driver of any vehicle to require or knowingly permit the operation of such vehicle upon a highway in any manner contrary to law.
(Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 556, § 122; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 1.)
Editor's notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1910, § 1770(1), are included in the annotations for this Code section.
- Term "automobile" has a definite popular significance and is understood to refer to a wheeled vehicle, propelled by gasoline, steam, or electricity, and used for the transportation of persons or merchandise. Carter v. State, 12 Ga. App. 430, 78 S.E. 205 (1913) (decided under former Code 1910, § 1770(1)).
Words, "propelled by steam, gas, gasoline, electricity, or any other power than muscular," referred to the phrase "any other vehicle," and not to the word "automobile." Carter v. State, 12 Ga. App. 430, 78 S.E. 205 (1913) (decided under former Code 1910, § 1770(1)).
Former Code 1910, § 1770 included a motorcycle propelled by gasoline. Bonds v. State, 16 Ga. App. 401, 85 S.E. 629 (1915) (decided under former Code 1910, § 1770(1)).
- If the state wants to prosecute a party who allowed an intoxicated driver to operate an automobile in violation of the statute governing driving under the influence, the state can use the intoximeter results obtained from the accused operator only if the state can prove that the state's evidence meets the statutory requirements for admissibility under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-392. Munda v. State, 172 Ga. App. 857, 324 S.E.2d 799 (1984).
- Person charged with permitting another person to operate an automobile contrary to the law governing driving under the influence has standing to contest the admissibility of an intoximeter test under the statute governing the introduction of such evidence. Munda v. State, 172 Ga. App. 857, 324 S.E.2d 799 (1984).
Cited in Beck v. Wade, 100 Ga. App. 79, 110 S.E.2d 43 (1959); Borochoff v. Russell, 108 Ga. App. 266, 132 S.E.2d 861 (1963).
- Once a school bus has been declared unsafe, a misdemeanor citation may be issued each time the bus is found moving on the highways for purposes other than effecting the requisite repairs. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-31.
- Citations may be issued not only to the driver of an unsafe vehicle, but also to any person who knew the vehicle to be in an unsafe condition and yet ordered or directed the driver to take the vehicle upon the highways, and to the owner of the vehicle if the owner knew of the unsafe condition and yet permitted continued operation of the vehicle. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-31.
- 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, §§ 223, 236, 268, 285, 286.
- 61A C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, §§ 1504 et seq., 1639, 1640, 1751 et seq.
Total Results: 3
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-02-18
Citation: 824 S.E.2d 255, 305 Ga. 170
Snippet: **172Fourteenth Amendment2 , and OCGA § 15-12-40.1.3 We disagree. To challenge the composition of a
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-03-01
Citation: 690 S.E.2d 415, 286 Ga. 562, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 535, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 178
Snippet: advancing this argument, ALF looks to OCGA § 48-4-40(1),[3] which sets an initial period of 12 months from
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2001-07-05
Citation: 549 S.E.2d 113, 274 Ga. 172, 2001 Ga. LEXIS 568
Snippet: revised probate code carries over former OCGA § 53-2-40.1. [3] However, similar issues have been addressed