Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 818.320 (2026)

Dragging objects on highway; civil liability; penalty

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

818.320 Dragging objects on highway; civil liability; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of dragging objects on a highway if the person does any of the following:

(a) Drives or moves on a highway any vehicle or combination of vehicles that is dragging upon or over the surface of the highway any logs, poles, piling or other thing.

(b) Owns a vehicle or combination of vehicles and causes or permits the vehicle or combination of vehicles to be driven or moved on a highway while dragging upon or over the surface of the highway any logs, poles, piling or other thing. Operation of any vehicle or combination of vehicles in violation of this section is prima facie evidence that the owner of the vehicle or combination caused or permitted the vehicle or combination to be so operated and the owner shall be liable for any penalties imposed under subsection (4) of this section as a result of the operation.

(2) The application of this section is subject to the exemptions from this section established under ORS 818.330.

(3) Violation of the offense described in this section is subject to civil liability under ORS 818.410.

(4) The offense described in this section, dragging objects on a highway, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §526; 1985 c.393 §32; 1995 c.383 §95]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1997–1997 · leading case: State v. Jackson, 945 P.2d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Jackson, 945 P.2d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “” The state argued that the stop was lawful, because Merila observed defendant commit several traffic infractions, including dragging the car’s tailpipe on the highway in violation of ORS 818.320. 1 Defendant responded that ORS 818.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 818.320(l)(a) — 1 case

State v. Jackson, 945 P.2d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “” The state argued that the stop was lawful, because Merila observed defendant commit several traffic infractions, including dragging the car’s tailpipe on the highway in violation of ORS 818.320. 1 Defendant responded that ORS 818.”

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.