Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (2026)
Following too closely
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.
- (b) The driver of any motor truck or motor vehicle towing another vehicle when traveling upon a roadway outside of a business or residence district and which is following another motor truck or motor vehicle towing another vehicle shall, whenever conditions permit, leave sufficient space so that an overtaking vehicle may enter and occupy that space without danger, except that this shall not prevent a motor truck or motor vehicle towing another vehicle from overtaking and passing any like vehicle or other vehicle.
- (c) Motor vehicles being driven upon any roadway outside of a business or residence district in a caravan or motorcade, whether or not towing other vehicles, shall be so operated as to allow sufficient space between each vehicle or combination of vehicles so as to enable any other vehicle to enter and occupy the space without danger. This subsection (c) does not apply to funeral processions.
- (d) Except for a motor vehicle in a platoon, no motor truck of more than one and one-half ton rated capacity shall approach any other motor truck of like or greater capacity proceeding in the same direction on any of the highways of this state without the corporate limits of any municipality at a distance nearer than three hundred feet (300'), except in overtaking and passing such other trucks, or unless one (1) or both of these trucks have come to a stop or except in rendering assistance to a disabled or partly disabled truck.
- (e) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
Amended by 2017 Tenn. Acts, ch. 171,s 3, eff. 4/24/2017.
Acts 1951, ch. 146, §§ 1, 2 (Williams, § 2715.10a); 1955, ch. 329, § 23; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 59-824; Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 113.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: State v. Harton, 108 S.W.3d 253 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002).
State v. Harton, 108 S.W.3d 253 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “The state contends the trial court erred (1) in declaring Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124, the “following too closely” statute, unconstitutionally vague; and (2) by finding an equal protection violation based upon selective prosecution due to the officers’ use of various “indicators”…”
Helms v. Weaver, 770 S.W.2d 552 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). “” In cases where the violation of T.C.A., § 55-8-124 was an issue, the reasonableness of the distance maintained by the operator of the following vehicle has been measured in terms of the operator’s ability to make an emergency stop without striking the forward vehicle where the…”
State v. McCrary, 45 S.W.3d 36 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). “” 1 In other words, it is undisputed that the traffic stop of the appellees’ vehicle was reasonable at its inception.”
United States v. Huff, 630 F. App'x 471 (6th Cir. 2015). “Under either the older or newer, standard, the Manual indicates Trooper Wilson had probable cause to stop Defendant for violating Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (a). According -to Trooper Wilson’s testimony at the suppression hearing, Defendant, in his GMC truck, was following too…”
United States v. Collazo, 37 F. Supp. 3d 942 (M.D. Tenn. 2014). “2007) (Officer who observed defendants’ vehicle momentarily follow another vehicle within a distance of 10 feet while traveling 65 miles-per-hour and a third vehicle passing in the passing lane had probable cause to believe Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124(a) had been violated, and was…”
State of Tennessee v. Steven Shell, 512 S.W.3d 267 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016). “55-10-401), Following Too Closely (T.C.A. 55-8-124), Simple Possession/Casual Exchange (T.”
United States v. Walton, 258 F. App'x 753 (6th Cir. 2007). “2007), in which we upheld a probable cause ruling for “following more closely than is reasonable and prudent” in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 . In Sanford, 476 F.”
Reener v. Hill & Williams Bros., Inc., 502 N.W.2d 26 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). “307 (1991); Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124(a) (1989). In Ellison , the defendant had been operating a tractor-trailer within the speed limit and came around a blind curve.”
State of Tennessee v. Mark Demcovitz (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (2004). -2- did, he got in behind a white four-door [s]edan at less than about a car length and was following it from there to almost Highway 64 close to a mile and at that time he switched back from that lane back to the right-hand lane again.”
United States v. Leeshawn Howard (6th Cir. 2020). “The district court ruled that Connors had probable cause to believe that Howard was both following too closely in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (a) and failing to drive as nearly as practicable within a single lane in violation of Tenn.”
State of Tennessee v. Mario Jones (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (e). In this case, Lieutenant Queen testified that he stopped Defendant for following too closely.”
State of Tennessee v. Jeffery McCraney (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). “The officer also testified that while he followed the Defendant he recognized the Defendant’s actions as “nervous” and “suspicious,” but did not witness any traffic violations besides the alleged violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-8-124(a). Based on this testimony,…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124(a) — 9 cases
Helms v. Weaver, 770 S.W.2d 552 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). “” In cases where the violation of T.C.A., § 55-8-124 was an issue, the reasonableness of the distance maintained by the operator of the following vehicle has been measured in terms of the operator’s ability to make an emergency stop without striking the forward vehicle where the…”
State v. Harton, 108 S.W.3d 253 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “The state contends the trial court erred (1) in declaring Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124, the “following too closely” statute, unconstitutionally vague; and (2) by finding an equal protection violation based upon selective prosecution due to the officers’ use of various “indicators”…”
United States v. Collazo, 37 F. Supp. 3d 942 (M.D. Tenn. 2014). “2007) (Officer who observed defendants’ vehicle momentarily follow another vehicle within a distance of 10 feet while traveling 65 miles-per-hour and a third vehicle passing in the passing lane had probable cause to believe Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124(a) had been violated, and was…”
United States v. Huff, 630 F. App'x 471 (6th Cir. 2015). “Under either the older or newer, standard, the Manual indicates Trooper Wilson had probable cause to stop Defendant for violating Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124 (a). According -to Trooper Wilson’s testimony at the suppression hearing, Defendant, in his GMC truck, was following too…”
Reener v. Hill & Williams Bros., Inc., 502 N.W.2d 26 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). “307 (1991); Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-8-124(a) (1989). In Ellison , the defendant had been operating a tractor-trailer within the speed limit and came around a blind curve.”
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.