La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 32:79 (2026)

Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§79.  Driving on roadway laned for traffic

Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply.

(1)  A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

(2)  The department may erect signs directing slow moving traffic to use a designated lane or designating those lanes to be used by traffic moving in a particular direction, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of such signs.

Acts 1962, No. 310, §1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 135 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1964–2026 · leading case: State of Louisiana v. Gerald W. Dahlem, 197 So. 3d 676 (La. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State of Louisiana v. Gerald W. Dahlem, 197 So. 3d 676 (La. 2016). · cites it 4× “R.S. 32:79), a license plate light violation (a violation of La.”
State v. Waters, 780 So. 2d 1053 (La. 2001). · cites it 2× “R.S. 32:79; conducted a routine driver's license and vehicle registration check; elicited partially conflicting accounts from respondent and his passenger of their itinerary as he observed their unusually nervous behavior; determined through a computer check that respondent had…”
Brewer v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 35 So. 3d 230 (La. 2010). · cites it 2× “Under LSA-R.S. 32:79, the driver on a roadway laned for traffic must drive as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and must not move from that lane until he or she has first ascertained such movement can be made with safety.”
Guillory v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 692 So. 2d 1029 (La. 1997). · cites it 2× “It is undisputed that Richard's violation of LSA-R.S. 32:79, which prohibits changing lanes without ascertaining that passage can be made safely, was a direct cause of the accident.”
Graham v. Edwards, 614 So. 2d 811 (La. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “LSA-R.S. 32:79 provides in pertinent part that, Driving on roadway laned for traffic Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply.”
Scott v. City of Mandeville, 69 F.4th 249 (5th Cir. 2023). “R.S. § 32:79 and for driving while intoxicated with 3 Case: 20-30507 Document: 00516760613 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/23/2023 No.”
State v. Arnold, 779 So. 2d 840 (La. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “DISCUSSION Initial Suburban Stop The defendants first argue that the initial stop was unlawful because there was no reasonable suspicion that the Suburban committed a traffic violation by touching the fog line because it did not leave its lane of travel.”
State v. Inzina, 728 So. 2d 458 (La. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “R.S. 32:79 which provides, in part that, whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, a vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first…”
Picou v. Ferrara, 483 So. 2d 915 (La. 1986). “R.S. 32:79(1), and whether he turned left at the intersection other than from the extreme left-hand lane in violation of La.”
Gaines v. Laura Wilson, State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 240 So. 3d 1010 (La. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “R.S. 32:79. 4 Ms. Wilson counters that the trial court correctly concluded that the cause of the accident was Ms.”
State v. Colarte, 688 So. 2d 587 (La. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “He maintains that there was no violation per se of LSA-R.S. 32:79, [4] dealing with improper lane usage.”
Whatley v. Reg'l Transit Auth., 563 So. 2d 1194 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “R.S. 32:79. Thus plaintiff concludes that the defendant should have been found 100% at fault in causing the accident.”
Show all 135 citing cases →
— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:79(1) — 30 cases
State v. Waters, 780 So. 2d 1053 (La. 2001). “R.S. 32:79; conducted a routine driver's license and vehicle registration check; elicited partially conflicting accounts from respondent and his passenger of their itinerary as he observed their unusually nervous behavior; determined through a computer check that respondent had…”
State v. Arnold, 779 So. 2d 840 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “DISCUSSION Initial Suburban Stop The defendants first argue that the initial stop was unlawful because there was no reasonable suspicion that the Suburban committed a traffic violation by touching the fog line because it did not leave its lane of travel.”
Picou v. Ferrara, 483 So. 2d 915 (La. 1986). “R.S. 32:79(1), and whether he turned left at the intersection other than from the extreme left-hand lane in violation of La.”
Prejeant v. Gray Ins. Co., 176 So. 3d 704 (La. Ct. App. 2015).
Daigle v. Mumphrey, 691 So. 2d 260 (La. Ct. App. 1997).
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.