ILCS » Chapter 625 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (2026)

Pedestrians walking on highways

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(625 ILCS 5/11-1007) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-1007)
    Sec. 11-1007. Pedestrians walking on highways.
    (a) Except as provided in subsection (e), where a sidewalk is provided and its use is practicable, it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.
    (b) Except as provided in subsection (e), where a sidewalk is not available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk only on a shoulder, as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.
    (c) Except as provided in subsection (e), where neither a sidewalk nor a shoulder is available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk as near as practicable to an outside edge of a roadway, and, if on a two-way roadway, shall walk only on the left side of the roadway.
    (d) Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, any pedestrian upon a roadway shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
    (e) In municipalities with a population of under 2,000,000 inhabitants, upon highways where the maximum posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour or less, and during the period from sunrise to sunset, a pedestrian who is 18 years of age or older and wearing in-line speed skates may travel upon the roadway as near as practicable to an outside edge of the roadway. Pedestrians wearing in-line speed skates upon a roadway may not impede or obstruct other vehicular traffic. Pedestrians wearing in-line speed skates shall be subject to all other rights and duties under this Article X. Nothing in this Code shall be construed to prevent a pedestrian wearing in-line speed skates from using a lane designated for bicycles.
(Source: P.A. 97-1023, eff. 1-1-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: People v. Shipp, 2020 IL App (2d) 190027 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Shipp, 2020 IL App (2d) 190027 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 2012); Freeport Municipal Code § 446.”
Sisk v. Williamson Cnty., 657 N.E.2d 903 (Ill. 1995). · cites it 2× “Section 11-1007 of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 1992)) states: "(a) Where a sidewalk is provided and its use is practicable, it shall be unlawful *906 for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 2011 IL App (2d) 100463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 3× “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
People v. Smith, 803 N.E.2d 1074 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “The trial court determined that there is no law that prohibited defendant from doing so as long as he complied with section 11-1007 of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 2000)), which addresses pedestrians walking on highways.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 2013 IL 113449 (Ill. 2013). “Walking in the middle of the street is a violation of section 11- 1007 of the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 2010)), and it is classified as a petty offense (625 ILCS 5/11-202 (West 2010)).”
Lewis v. Haavig, 788 N.E.2d 758 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “01; 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(b) (West 1997). The instruction provided: "There was in force in the State of Illinois at the time of the occurrence in question a certain statute which provided that: Where a sidewalk is not available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall…”
Vaughn v. City of West Frankfort, 651 N.E.2d 1115 (Ill. 1995). “" (625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a), (b) (West 1992).) Plaintiff urges, and the appellate court found, that the statutory sections cited above indicate that pedestrians are permitted and intended users of the streets outside the crosswalk.”
People v. Rich, 2025 IL App (1st) 230818 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 2× “” 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2018). Defendant does not dispute that he was walking in the middle of 67th Street.”
Flynn v. Town of Normal, 119 N.E.3d 522 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “(citing 625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 1992) ). The court rejected the plaintiff's argument, finding a duty of care should not be imposed on the defendant county "to keep its rural country roads free from defects which may cause injuries to pedestrians.”
Sisk v. Williamson Cnty., 632 N.E.2d 672 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). · cites it 3× “(c) Where neither a sidewalk nor a shoulder is available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk as near as practicable to an outside edge of a roadway, and, if on a two-way roadway, shall walk only on the left side of the roadway.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 960 N.E.2d 709 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 3× “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
Vaughn v. City of West Frankfort, 630 N.E.2d 526 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “) (625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 1992).) Again, while the primary emphasis of the statute is to limit and regulate pedestrian use of roadways, none of its subsections prohibit pedestrian use of the roadway.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) — 6 cases
Vaughn v. City of West Frankfort, 651 N.E.2d 1115 (Ill. 1995). “" (625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a), (b) (West 1992).) Plaintiff urges, and the appellate court found, that the statutory sections cited above indicate that pedestrians are permitted and intended users of the streets outside the crosswalk.”
People v. Shipp, 2020 IL App (2d) 190027 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007 (West 2012); Freeport Municipal Code § 446.”
People v. Rich, 2025 IL App (1st) 230818 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “” 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2018). Defendant does not dispute that he was walking in the middle of 67th Street.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 2011 IL App (2d) 100463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 960 N.E.2d 709 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
— 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(b) — 4 cases
Lewis v. Haavig, 788 N.E.2d 758 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “01; 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(b) (West 1997). The instruction provided: "There was in force in the State of Illinois at the time of the occurrence in question a certain statute which provided that: Where a sidewalk is not available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall…”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 2011 IL App (2d) 100463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
Sisk v. Williamson Cnty., 632 N.E.2d 672 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “(c) Where neither a sidewalk nor a shoulder is available, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk as near as practicable to an outside edge of a roadway, and, if on a two-way roadway, shall walk only on the left side of the roadway.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 960 N.E.2d 709 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
— 625 ILCS 5/11-1007(c) — 3 cases
People v. Fitzpatrick, 2011 IL App (2d) 100463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
People v. Fitzpatrick, 960 N.E.2d 709 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “625 ILCS 5/11-1007(a) (West 2008). Where no sidewalk is provided a pedestrian must walk on the shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.”
People v. Thompson (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
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.