(a) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle only under the following conditions:
(1) When the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn;
(2) Upon a street or highway with unobstructed pavement not occupied by parked vehicles of sufficient width for two (2) or more lines of moving vehicles in each direction;
(3) Upon a one-way street or upon any roadway on which traffic is restricted to one (1) direction of movement where the roadway is free from obstructions and of sufficient width for two (2) or more lines of moving vehicles.
(b) (1) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass another vehicle upon the right only under conditions permitting this movement in safety.
(2) In no event shall this movement be made by driving off the pavement or main-traveled portion of the roadway.
History. Acts 1937, No. 300, § 59; Pope's Dig., § 6717; Acts 1959, No. 307, § 25; A.S.A. 1947, § 75-610.
Cross References. Penalty for violation of 1959 amendatory act, § 27-50-305.
Case Notes
Instructions.
Jury Questions.
Negligence.
Where a motorcycle ridden by a minor and a car driven by the defendant collided, it was not reversible error to refuse to instruct the jury that a minor should not be held to the same standard of care as an adult and that a higher degree of care is owed to minors, as this section and §§ 27-16-204, 27-16-206, 27-16-207, 27-51-201, 27-51-208 - 27-51-211, and 27-51-306, pertaining to safety on the highways, disclose no distinction between the degree of care to be exercised by a minor and an adult. Harrelson v. Whitehead, 236 Ark. 325, 365 S.W.2d 868 (1963).
Whether the curb lane of a four-lane street was part of the traveled portion of the street or of the “shoulder” within the meaning of this section when such lane was marked and divided into parking spaces with parking meters on the curb was a question of fact, and the finding of a jury in an automobile collision case for the driver attempting to pass in such lane a car ahead in the second lane from the curb indicated their conclusion that it was part of the roadway regularly used, absent parked vehicles. Moore v. Cook, 243 Ark. 502, 420 S.W.2d 905 (1967).
Where automobile stopped near the center of four-lane road at intersection with through highway, and truck intending to turn right on highway pulled to the right of the automobile near the edge of the road, and automobile, though its driver's view was obstructed by truck, drove across and was struck by another automobile traveling on through highway which had the right-of-way, driver of truck was not guilty of any negligence. Ozark Natural Gas Co. v. Moore, 201 Ark. 283, 144 S.W.2d 35 (1940).