Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 257 / Act 300 of 1949
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.614 (2026)

Flashing red or yellow signals; violation as civil infraction.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE


Act 300 of 1949


257.614 Flashing red or yellow signals; violation as civil infraction.

Sec. 614.

    (1) If flashing red or yellow signals are used, they shall require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows:

    (a) Flashing red (stop signal). When a red lens is illuminated by rapid intermittent flashes, drivers of vehicles shall stop before entering the nearest crosswalk at an intersection or at a limit line when marked and the right to proceed shall be subject to the rules applicable after making a stop at a stop sign.

    (b) Flashing yellow (caution signal). When a yellow lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, drivers of vehicles may proceed through the intersection or past the signal only with caution.

    (2) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.

History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 510, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1953–2023 · leading case: DePriest v. Kooiman, 149 N.W.2d 449 (Mich. 1967).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
DePriest v. Kooiman, 149 N.W.2d 449 (Mich. 1967). · cites it 2× “It is not the law of this State that a motorist proceeding on a favored trunkline, toward an intersection controlled by flashing lights under said CLS 1961, § 257.614, must slow down to an insurer’s rate of speed when he sees another motor vehicle approach on the nonfavored way,…”
Churukian v. LaGest, 97 N.W.2d 832 (Mich. 1959). · cites it 2× “CLS 1956, §§ 257.614, 257.651 (Stat Ann 1952 Rev §§ 9.”
Schaibly v. Vinton, 61 N.W.2d 122 (Mich. 1953). “” PA 1949, No 300, § 614 (CL 1948, § 257.614 [Stat Ann 1952 Rev § 9.2314]). The automobiles of plaintiff and defendant collided at this intersection.”
Cookson v. Humphrey, 93 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. 1959). “Defendant stopped the truck at the south entrance to the intersection as required by the red flasher signal (CDS 1956, §257.614 [Stat Ann 1952 Rev § 9.2314]). He testified that he saw plaintiff’s motorcycle and the automobile just ahead and to the left of it approaching at a…”
Berk v. Blaha, 184 N.W.2d 926 (Mich. 1971). · cites it 3× “MCLA § 257.614 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 9.2314).”
Moffatt v. Helmer, 75 N.W.2d 887 (Mich. 1956). “* CLS 1954, § 257.614 (Stat Ann 1952 Rev § 9.2314).”
DePriest v. Kooiman, 140 N.W.2d 538 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966). ““and so, I shall read now from CLS 1961, § 257.614 (Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 9.2314), as follows: “ ‘Whenever flashing red or yellow signals are used, they shall require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows: “ T.”
Berk v. Blaha, 174 N.W.2d 870 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 6× “Plaintiffs’ driver breached bis plain duty under MCLA §§ 257.614, 257.651 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §§ 9.”
Haney v. Frederick v. Gentsch, Inc., 118 N.W.2d 491 (Mich. 1962). “CLS 1956, §§ 257.614, 257.651 (Stat Ann 1952 Rev §§ 9.”
Latricia Howard v. Lacey Renee Wistinghausen (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to plaintiff as the nonmoving party and accepting as true her testimony that she entered the intersection after stopping for a flashing red light, her actions were governed by MCL 257.614(1)(a), which provides as follows: (1) If…”
20230202_C358189_49_358189.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “We thus begin by considering MCL 257.614, which provides as follows: (1) If flashing red or yellow signals are used, they shall require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows: (a) Flashing red (stop signal).”
Onwenu v. Bacigal (E.D. Mich. 2019). “§ 257.614(1)(b). Onwenu did not “proceed through the intersection.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.614(1)(a) — 2 cases
Latricia Howard v. Lacey Renee Wistinghausen (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to plaintiff as the nonmoving party and accepting as true her testimony that she entered the intersection after stopping for a flashing red light, her actions were governed by MCL 257.614(1)(a), which provides as follows: (1) If…”
20230202_C358189_49_358189.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “We thus begin by considering MCL 257.614, which provides as follows: (1) If flashing red or yellow signals are used, they shall require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows: (a) Flashing red (stop signal).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.614(1)(b) — 1 case
Onwenu v. Bacigal (E.D. Mich. 2019). “§ 257.614(1)(b). Onwenu did not “proceed through the intersection.”
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.