O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 40-6-312 (2019)

Operating motorcycle on roadway laned for traffic

✓ 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) All motorcycles are entitled to full use of a lane, and no motor vehicle shall be driven in such a manner as to deprive any motorcycle of the full use of a lane. This subsection shall not apply to motorcycles operated two abreast in a single lane.

(b) The operator of a motorcycle shall not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken.

(c) No person shall operate a motorcycle between lanes of traffic or between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles.

(d) Motorcycles shall not be operated more than two abreast in a single lane.

(e) A person operating a motorcycle shall at all times keep his headlights and taillights illuminated.

(f) Subsections (b) and (c) of this Code section shall not apply to police officers in the performance of their official duties.

History

(Code 1933, § 68A-1303, enacted by Ga. L. 1974, p. 633, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 5.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Evidence sufficient to find violation of subsection (a). - Trial court properly denied a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict since the movant, driving a van, had attempted to overtake and pass a motorcycle without changing lanes, resulting in a collision. The evidence was such that the jury could have reasonably found that the movant violated both O.C.G.A. §§ 40-6-42(1) and 40-6-312. Neiswonger v. Janics, 196 Ga. App. 607, 396 S.E.2d 553 (1990).

Charging section because of skid mark. - Even though evidence indicated that a motorcycle skid mark was found near the location on the highway where the collision between the motorcycle and truck occurred and the skid mark ran from the center line to the side of the road which would serve as evidence that at the time the brakes were applied on the motorcycle it was on the center line if not in the same lane with the vehicle being passed, the trial court erred in charging the jury with respect to O.C.G.A. § 40-6-312 since there was no evidence associating the skid mark and the motorcycle involved in the collision. Exum v. Long, 157 Ga. App. 592, 278 S.E.2d 13 (1981).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d. - 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, §§ 206, 254.

ALR. - Reciprocal duties of driver of automobile and bicyclist or motorcyclist, 172 A.L.R. 736.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1990–1990 · leading case: Neiswonger v. Janics, 396 S.E.2d 553 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Neiswonger v. Janics, 396 S.E.2d 553 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 8× “Moreover, "[t]he driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance...." OCGA § 40-6-42 (1). The jury was authorized to find that appellant violated this statute, especially when its provisions are…”
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.