Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 4511.49 (2026)

Pedestrians on right half of crosswalk

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Effective:

January 1, 2004

Latest Legislation:

Senate Bill 123 - 124th General Assembly

PDF:

Download Authenticated PDF

(A) Pedestrians shall move, whenever practicable, upon the right half of crosswalks.

(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.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1958–2000 · leading case: State v. Jones, 88 Ohio St. 3d 430 (2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Jones, 88 Ohio St. 3d 430 (2000). “48[C]), walking in the left-hand side of a crosswalk (R.C. 4511.49), walking upon the roadway when a useable sidewalk is provided (R.”

Parnell v. Bell, 191 N.E.2d 220 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1963). · cites it 2× “Finally, was the plaintiff’s decedent guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law? Section 4511.49, Revised Code, reads, in part, as follows: “Pedestrians shall not step into or upon a public road or highway without looking in both directions to see what is approaching.”

Difederico v. Reed, 255 N.E.2d 869 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1969). · cites it 2× “* * *” Because the instant case is concerned with an “approaching” vehicle, we note a decision construing Section 4511.49, Revised Code, directed to pedestrians, Leach Admx.”

Ashworth v. Morrison, 196 N.E.2d 465 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1963). · cites it 2× “This is because of Section 4511.49, Revised Code. But if a person walks across a privately owned plot of land without looking for automobiles and is struck by one, he cannot be charged with negligence, for he had a right to assume that no automobile would be there.”

State v. Jones, 88 Ohio St. 3d 430 (2000). “53), and riding a bicycle that is not equipped with a bell or other sounding device giving a signal audible for a distance of at least one hundred feet (R.”

Galuppo v. Violi, 151 N.E.2d 909 (Ohio Ct. App. 1958). “If he was amenable to the statute, §4511.49 R. C., and was required to look both ways for traffic in the road, specific obligation to so look was enjoined upon him only when he started across the road and, if then the way seemed clear, he was not bound, as a matter of law, to…”

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.