Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24 (2026)

A. The driver or rider of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in this Section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§24. Emergency vehicles; exceptions

A. The driver or rider of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in this Section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

B. The driver or rider of an authorized emergency vehicle may do any of the following:

(1) Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of this Chapter.

(2) Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down or stopping as may be necessary for safe operation.

(3) Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he does not endanger life or property.

(4) Disregard regulations governing the direction of movement or turning in specified directions.

C. The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle shall apply only when such vehicle or bicycle is making use of audible or visual signals, including the use of a peace officer cycle rider's whistle, sufficient to warn motorists of their approach, except that a police vehicle need not be equipped with or display a red light visible from in front of the vehicle.

D. The foregoing provisions shall not relieve the driver or rider of an authorized vehicle from the duty to drive or ride with due regard for the safety of all persons, nor shall such provisions protect the driver or rider from the consequences of his reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Acts 1962, No. 310, §1. Amended by Acts 1980, No. 160, §1; Acts 2011, No. 98, §1, eff. August 15, 2011.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 116 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1963–2023 · leading case: Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). · cites it 48× “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Fontenot v. Patterson Ins., 23 So. 3d 259 (La. 2009). · cites it 12× “R.S. 32:24 affords traffic privileges to the drivers of emergency vehicles while providing protection to the citizens in the community.”

Pope v. Prunty, 852 So. 2d 1213 (La. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 15× “The trial court found that the conduct of Prunty in the instant response must comply with subsections A, B and C of R.S. 32:24 (quoted infra ) to benefit from a "gross negligence" standard of review.”

Neloms v. Empire Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 859 So. 2d 225 (La. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 7× “R.S. 32:24 provides: A. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set…”

Young v. Marsh, 153 So. 3d 1245 (La. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 7× “R.S. 32:24, which provides: A. The driver or rider of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the…”

Griffin v. City of Monroe, 61 So. 3d 846 (La. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 7× “R.S. 32:24 states: A. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set…”

Walker v. Bankston, 571 So. 2d 690 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 7× “LRS 32:24. This duty is statutorily mandated even though the driver of the emergency vehicle is exempt from highway regulations according to LRS 32:24.”

Champagne v. McDonald, 355 So. 2d 1335 (La. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 5× “We likewise reject the contention that the provisions of LSA-R.S. 32:24 [1] should be extended to this situation so as to relieve McDonald of "a technical violation of the red light stop law".”

Spears v. City of Scott, 915 So. 2d 983 (La. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 6× “R.S. 32:24 provides in pertinent part: A.”

Matthews v. Maddie, 822 So. 2d 739 (La. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 7× “R.S. 32:24 prescribes the privileges and duties of the driver of an emergency vehicle, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: A.”

Janise v. Acadian Ambulance Serv., Inc., 244 So. 3d 541 (La. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 17× “R.S. 32:24, which is set forth in pertinent part below, "the driver of an emergency vehicle can be held liable only if his conduct amounts to reckless disregard for the safety of others.”

Jones v. Am. Alt. Ins. Corp., 169 So. 3d 386 (La. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 7× “R.S. 32:24 applied to Ms. Jones’ claims. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment and the alternative motion for partial summary judgment, and writs of review were denied by this court and the Louisiana Supreme Court.”

Show all 116 citing cases →

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(A) — 12 cases

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Fontenot v. Patterson Ins., 23 So. 3d 259 (La. 2009). “R.S. 32:24 affords traffic privileges to the drivers of emergency vehicles while providing protection to the citizens in the community.”

Neloms v. Empire Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 859 So. 2d 225 (La. Ct. App. 2003). “R.S. 32:24 provides: A. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set…”

Matthews v. Maddie, 822 So. 2d 739 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “R.S. 32:24 prescribes the privileges and duties of the driver of an emergency vehicle, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: A.”

Courville v. City of Lake Charles, 720 So. 2d 789 (La. Ct. App. 1998).

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(A)(1) — 1 case

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(B) — 5 cases

Fontenot v. Patterson Ins., 23 So. 3d 259 (La. 2009). “R.S. 32:24 affords traffic privileges to the drivers of emergency vehicles while providing protection to the citizens in the community.”

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Inzinna v. Guitreau, 272 So. 3d 582 (La. Ct. App. 2019).

White v. Normand, 222 So. 3d 205 (La. Ct. App. 2017).

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(B)(1) — 1 case

Ortego v. Roy Motors, Inc., 690 So. 2d 780 (La. Ct. App. 1996).

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(B)(2) — 4 cases

Young v. Marsh, 153 So. 3d 1245 (La. Ct. App. 2014). “R.S. 32:24, which provides: A. The driver or rider of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the…”

Janise v. Acadian Ambulance Serv., Inc., 244 So. 3d 541 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “R.S. 32:24, which is set forth in pertinent part below, "the driver of an emergency vehicle can be held liable only if his conduct amounts to reckless disregard for the safety of others.”

Harrell v. City of Shreveport, 92 So. 3d 1180 (La. Ct. App. 2012).

Ivy Dixon v. Louisiana State Police, State of Louisiana, Through the Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., Colonel Kevin W. Reeves, in His Capacity as the Superintendent of Louisiana State Police, & Helen Elizabeth Delatte (La. Ct. App. 2022).

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(B)(3) — 4 cases

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Carpenter v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 333 So. 2d 296 (La. Ct. App. 1976).

Butcher v. City of Monroe, 737 So. 2d 189 (La. Ct. App. 1999).

Harrell v. City of Shreveport, 92 So. 3d 1180 (La. Ct. App. 2012).

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(B)(4) — 1 case

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(C) — 13 cases

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Smith v. Com. Union Ins. Co., 609 So. 2d 1024 (La. Ct. App. 1992).

Jones v. Am. Alt. Ins. Corp., 169 So. 3d 386 (La. Ct. App. 2015). “R.S. 32:24 applied to Ms. Jones’ claims. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment and the alternative motion for partial summary judgment, and writs of review were denied by this court and the Louisiana Supreme Court.”

Spears v. City of Scott, 915 So. 2d 983 (La. Ct. App. 2005). “R.S. 32:24 provides in pertinent part: A.”

— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:24(D) — 23 cases

Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “Under the circumstances, we find that LSA-R.S. 32:24, is applicable and that Nash's actions are covered by the statute.”

Dakmak v. Baton Rouge City Police Dep't, 153 So. 3d 498 (La. Ct. App. 2014).

Cassity v. Williams, 373 So. 2d 586 (La. Ct. App. 1979).

Matthews v. Maddie, 822 So. 2d 739 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “R.S. 32:24 prescribes the privileges and duties of the driver of an emergency vehicle, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: A.”

Smith v. Com. Union Ins. Co., 609 So. 2d 1024 (La. Ct. App. 1992).

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.