SUBCHAPTER B
TRAFFIC-CONTROL DEVICES
Sec.
3111. Obedience to traffic-control devices.
3111.1. Obedience to traffic-control devices warning of hazardous conditions.
3112. Traffic-control signals.
3113. Pedestrian-control signals.
3114. Flashing signals.
3115. Lane-direction-control signals.
3116. Automated red light enforcement systems in first class cities.
3117. Automated red light enforcement systems in certain municipalities.
Cross References. Subchapter B is referred to in section 3344 of this title.
§ 3111. Obedience to traffic-control devices.
(a) General rule.--Unless otherwise directed by a uniformed police officer or any appropriately attired
person authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic, the driver of any vehicle
shall obey the instructions of any applicable official traffic-control device placed
or held in accordance with the provisions of this title, subject to the privileges
granted the driver of an emergency vehicle in this title.
(a.1) Penalty.--
(1) A person who violates this section commits a summary offense and shall, upon conviction,
pay a fine of $150. No costs or surcharges imposed under 42 Pa.C.S. § 1725.1 (relating
to costs) or section 6506 (relating to surcharge) shall be assessed or imposed upon
a conviction under this section.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including 42 Pa.C.S. § 3733(a) (relating
to deposits into account), the fine collected under paragraph (1) shall be deposited
as follows:
(i) Twenty-five dollars of the fine shall be deposited as provided under 42 Pa.C.S. §
3733(a).
(ii) After deposit of the amount under subparagraph (i), the remaining portion of the fine
shall be deposited into the Public Transportation Trust Fund.
(b) Proper position and legibility of device.--No provision of this title for which official traffic-control devices are required
shall be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the alleged
violation an official device is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to
be seen by an ordinarily observant person. Whenever a particular section does not
state that official traffic-control devices are required, the section shall be effective
even though no devices are erected or in place.
(c) Presumption of authorized placement.--Whenever official traffic-control devices are placed or held in position approximately
conforming to the requirements of this title, the devices shall be presumed to have
been so placed by the official act or direction of lawful authority, unless the contrary
shall be established by competent evidence.
(d) Presumption of proper devices.--Any official traffic-control device placed or held pursuant to the provisions of this
title and purporting to conform to the lawful requirements pertaining to such devices
shall be presumed to comply with the requirements of this title, unless the contrary
shall be established by competent evidence.
(June 26, 2001, P.L.734, No.75, eff. 60 days; Nov. 25, 2013, P.L.974, No.89, eff.
Jan. 1, 2014; Dec. 23, 2013, P.L.1251, No.126, eff. imd.)
2013 Amendments. Act 89 added subsec. (a.1) and Act 126 amended subsec. (a.1). See the preamble to
Act 89 in the appendix to this title for special provisions relating to legislative
findings and declarations.
2001 Amendment. Act 75 amended subsec. (a).
Cross References. Section 3111 is referred to in sections 3326, 3327 of this title; section 1506 of
Title 74 (Transportation).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
41
cases (
16 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Karash, 175 A.3d 306 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
Commonwealth v. Karash, 175 A.3d 306 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 3× “Instead, the statute at issue in Williams was 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111, entitled Obedience to traffic-control devices, reading in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
Miseo v. Ross Twp. Police Dep't, 607 A.2d 806 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 2× “Additional guidance in interpreting the expression "official traffic-control devices" is provided by subsection 3111(a) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a), which requires the driver of any non-emergency vehicle to "obey the instructions of any applicable official…”
Slough v. City of Philadelphia, 686 A.2d 62 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996).
“— Unless otherwise directed by a uniformed police officer or any appropriately attired person authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic, the driver of any vehicle shall obey the instructions of any applicable official traffic-control device placed or held in accordance…”
Pettineo v. City of Philadelphia Law Dep't-Claims Div., 721 A.2d 65 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Further, the yellow nylon police rope is unlike a bus stop, inasmuch as it actively functioned to restrict the flow and movement of all traffic, and one could presumably be prosecuted under Section 3111 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.”
Passel v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 928 A.2d 381 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“With respect to Passel’s summary conviction, after a de novo hearing, Judge Fornelli, on August 23, 2006, entered the following order: AND NOW, August 23, 2006, the oral motion of the Commonwealth to amend the Information to include Obedience to Traffic Control Devices, in…”
Commonwealth v. Lyons, 390 A.2d 752 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
· cites it 2× “§ 3731 now prohibits driving under the influence of alcohol. [2] The Vehicle Code, supra; 75 P.”
Garrett by Garrett v. Moyston, 562 A.2d 386 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
“7 The term “official traffic-control devices” must be reviewed in pari materia with Section 3111 of the Motor Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111, which provides in relevant part: (a) Unless otherwise directed by a uniformed police officer .”
Com. v. Atkinson, D., 2021 Pa. Super. 208 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2021).
“§ 3802(a)(1), as well as a violation of the VC for disregarding a traffic device, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a). On March 13, 2013, Atkinson was found guilty in the now-eliminated Traffic Court of Philadelphia of the offense of disregarding a traffic device.”
Commonwealth v. Long, 577 A.2d 899 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1990).
“75 Pa.C.S. § 3111. Department of Transportation regulations concerning school zone speed limits are also set forth in Title 67 of the Pennsylvania Code: (a) Establishment.”
M. Mshimba v. PennDOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 4× “at 8b); a copy of a November 24, 2014 notice of suspension advising Licensee that his operating privilege was being suspended as a consequence of his failure to make regular payments on fines, costs and restitution for a violation of 75 Pa. C.S. §3111, relating to obedience to…”
Com. v. Hilliker, A. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 4× “On February 7, 2012, Appellant was arrested and charged with obedience to traffic control devices, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a),2 as well as the 1 75 Pa.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3111(A) — 2 cases
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3111(a) — 24 cases
Miseo v. Ross Twp. Police Dep't, 607 A.2d 806 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
“Additional guidance in interpreting the expression "official traffic-control devices" is provided by subsection 3111(a) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a), which requires the driver of any non-emergency vehicle to "obey the instructions of any applicable official…”
Slough v. City of Philadelphia, 686 A.2d 62 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996).
“— Unless otherwise directed by a uniformed police officer or any appropriately attired person authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic, the driver of any vehicle shall obey the instructions of any applicable official traffic-control device placed or held in accordance…”
Passel v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 928 A.2d 381 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“With respect to Passel’s summary conviction, after a de novo hearing, Judge Fornelli, on August 23, 2006, entered the following order: AND NOW, August 23, 2006, the oral motion of the Commonwealth to amend the Information to include Obedience to Traffic Control Devices, in…”
Com. v. Atkinson, D., 2021 Pa. Super. 208 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2021).
“§ 3802(a)(1), as well as a violation of the VC for disregarding a traffic device, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a). On March 13, 2013, Atkinson was found guilty in the now-eliminated Traffic Court of Philadelphia of the offense of disregarding a traffic device.”
Com. v. Hilliker, A. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“On February 7, 2012, Appellant was arrested and charged with obedience to traffic control devices, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3111(a),2 as well as the 1 75 Pa.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3111(c) — 2 cases
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.