(A) The operator of a vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley about to enter or cross a highway from any place other than another roadway shall yield the right of way to all traffic approaching on the roadway to be entered or crossed.
(B) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree.
If the offender commits the offense while distracted and the distracting activity is a contributing factor to the commission of the offense, the offender is subject to the additional fine established under section 4511.991 of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1954–2024 · leading case: In Re Neill, 827 N.E.2d 811 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).
In Re Neill, 827 N.E.2d 811 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5ד22, failure to yield, is identical to R.C. 4511.44. Our analysis will be conducted in reference to R.”
Middleton v. Holbrook, 2016 Ohio 3387 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2ד9-15-47 an unusual analysis with respect to the right-of-way issue, indicating that it was “undisputed * * * that the Plaintiff failed to yield the right of way to the Defendant * * * .” (R.”
Gelbman v. Second Nat'l Bank, 458 N.E.2d 1262 (Ohio 1984). · cites it 2דTo hold that pedestrians are similarly entitled to legal protection from the garage for the conduct of its patrons would be to create an unnecessary extension of a duty beyond the limits required under the law of negligence as we know it.”
State v. Young, 552 N.E.2d 226 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 7דYoung, appeals the judgment of the Athens County Municipal Court which found him guilty of violating R.C. 4511.44 by failing to yield to approaching traffic.”
State v. Bassham, 762 N.E.2d 963 (Ohio 2002). “19 and with failure to yield when entering a road from a private drive in violation of R.C. 4511.44. On October 5, 1999, appellant moved to suppress evidence.”
Bennett v. Krauss, 137 N.E.2d 411 (Ohio Ct. App. 1956). · cites it 6ד” Section 4511.44, Revised Code, provides: “The operator of a vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley about to enter or cross a highway from a private road, driveway, alley, or building shall stop and yield the right of way to all traffic approaching on said highway.”
Vill. of Blanchester v. Hester, 612 N.E.2d 412 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). “On May 31, 1991, appellee was charged with failure to yield right of way pursuant, to R.C. 4511.44; fleeing and eluding pursuant to R.”
State v. Carpenter, 615 N.E.2d 1103 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2דCounty Municipal Court for failure to yield in violation of R.C. 4511.44. The trial judge fined appellant $25.”
State v. Reedy, 2012 Ohio 4899 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). “R.C. 4511.44(A). Appellee and the trial court looked to the common definition of “upon,” which means “movement in a given position or toward a specified object” to support the position that movement toward the highway required appellant to use his turn signal.”
Ohio Cas. Ins. v. Gudger, 456 N.E.2d 547 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2דGudger as she left the Jones driveway is stated in R.C. 4511.44, which provides as follows: “The operator of a vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley about to enter or cross a highway from any place other than another roadway shall yield the right of way to all traffic…”
Hudson v. Anderson Concrete Co., 453 N.E.2d 1289 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982). “1 For purposes of this opinion, we assume that Slaughter was “lawfully” in an “intersection” since no issue was raised in the trial court as to the applicability and effect of R.C. 4511.44 or R.C. 4511.01(KK).”
Yukech v. California Transp., LLC (S.D. Ohio 2023). · cites it 10ד22(A), as that allegation was added to the Amended Complaint after Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment.”
Middleton v. Holbrook, 2016 Ohio 3387 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “9-15-47 an unusual analysis with respect to the right-of-way issue, indicating that it was “undisputed * * * that the Plaintiff failed to yield the right of way to the Defendant * * * .” (R.”
In Re Neill, 827 N.E.2d 811 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). “22, failure to yield, is identical to R.C. 4511.44. Our analysis will be conducted in reference to R.”
State v. Reedy, 2012 Ohio 4899 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). “R.C. 4511.44(A). Appellee and the trial court looked to the common definition of “upon,” which means “movement in a given position or toward a specified object” to support the position that movement toward the highway required appellant to use his turn signal.”
In Re Neill, 827 N.E.2d 811 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). “22, failure to yield, is identical to R.C. 4511.44. Our analysis will be conducted in reference to R.”
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.