MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE
Act 300 of 1949
257.679a Limited access highway; pedestrians and certain vehicles prohibited; bicycles permitted on paths; violation as civil infraction.
Sec. 679a.
(1) A person shall not operate a motorcycle with less than a 125 cubic centimeter engine, moped, farm tractor, or other self-propelled farm implement, nor shall a pedestrian, bicycle, except as provided in this section, or other nonmotorized traffic be permitted on a limited access highway in this state. Bicycles shall be permitted on paths constructed separately from the roadway and designated for the exclusive use of bicycles.
(2) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.
History: Add. 1961, Act 164, Eff. Sept. 8, 1961 ;-- Am. 1964, Act 222, Eff. Aug. 28, 1964 ;-- Am. 1969, Act 134, Imd. Eff. June 1, 1970 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 212, Imd. Eff. July 19, 1974 ;-- Am. 1976, Act 439, Imd. Eff. Jan. 13, 1977 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 510, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2023 · leading case:
Roy v. Dep't of Transp., 408 N.W.2d 783 (Mich. 1987).
Roy v. Dep't of Transp., 408 N.W.2d 783 (Mich. 1987).
· cites it 4× “MCL 257.679a; MSA 9.2379(1). Thus, where paths have been provided for cyclists, the state requires the cyclists to use the paths, forcing them off the roads where they normally have a right to be.”
People v. Otto, 284 N.W.2d 273 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 3× “Where an officer stops a hitchhiker on the freeway in violation of MCL 257.679a; MSA 9.2379(1) and, in lieu of issuing a citation under MCL 257.”
Hatch v. Grand Haven Twp., 606 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. 2000).
· cites it 2× “§ 257.679a; MSA 9.2379(1). Therefore, while a paved way's proximity to a highway is a necessary condition for determining that it is a sidewalk under the highway exception to governmental immunity, it is not a sufficient condition.”
Fire Ins. Exch. v. Fox, 423 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “1916(1) (registration and certification of title provision); MCL 257.679a; MSA 9.2379(1), MCL 257.710d(3); MSA 9.”
People v. Laube, 397 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986).
“See MCL 257.679a; MSA 9.2379(1). The deputies, who were in a patrol car, approached the defendant and asked him what he was doing.”
D Est. of Omari Bell v. Jeffrey Knapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 2× “See MCL 257.679a. In contrast, according to Knapp’s uncontradicted deposition testimony, Knapp was traveling in a designated lane of travel, and he was not exceeding the speed limit.”
Ronald Fountaine Jr v. Randy Steven Hersey (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “4 Hersey also argues that plaintiff’s conduct violated MCL 257.679a, which prohibits pedestrians from being on a limited access highway.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.679a(1) — 1 case
D Est. of Omari Bell v. Jeffrey Knapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“See MCL 257.679a. In contrast, according to Knapp’s uncontradicted deposition testimony, Knapp was traveling in a designated lane of travel, and he was not exceeding the speed limit.”
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.