O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 40-6-25 (2019)

Display of unauthorized signs, signals, or markings

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) No person shall place, maintain, or display upon or in view of any highway any sign, signal, marking, or device which purports to be or is an imitation of or resembles an official traffic-control device or railroad sign or signal or which attempts to direct the movement of traffic or which hides from view or interferes with the effectiveness of an official traffic-control device or any railroad sign or signal. (b) No person shall maintain or place nor shall any public authority permit upon any highway any traffic sign or signal bearing thereon any commercial advertising. (c) This Code section shall not be deemed to prohibit the erection upon private property adjacent to highways of signs giving useful directional information and of a type that cannot be mistaken for official signs.

(d) Every such prohibited sign, signal, or marking is declared to be a public nuisance, and the authority having jurisdiction over the highway is empowered to remove it or cause it to be removed without notice.

History

(Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 556, § 38; Code 1933, § 68A-205, enacted by Ga. L. 1974, p. 633, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 5.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Provisions regarding erection, placement, or maintenance of unauthorized traffic signs or signals, § 32-6-51. Law reviews. - For article, ‘‘Recom-

mendations Regarding Control of Outdoor Advertising Along the Interstate Highway System in Georgia,’’ see 14 Mercer L. Rev. 308 (1963).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1988–1997 · leading case: City of Fairburn v. Cook, 372 S.E.2d 245 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Fairburn v. Cook, 372 S.E.2d 245 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “Nothing in OCGA § 32-6-197, cited by appellee, places any duty on a railroad regarding the installation or maintenance of traffic control devices in the area around a railroad underpass. That statute merely references a railroad's duty to maintain the underpass itself, and…”

Franklin v. State, 481 S.E.2d 852 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Appellant testified at trial that the arresting officer told him that he was stopped because his rear light was out and showed him “where was considered the defective light.”

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.