Any pedestrian who uses any street or highway negligently or recklessly or fails to obey the signal of any traffic officer, pedestrian control, sign, signal, marking or device or recklessly disregards his own safety or the safety of any person by the manner of his use of any street or highway shall be deemed to have committed an infraction and be fined not less than thirty-five dollars nor more than fifty dollars.

(1949 Rev., S. 8513; February, 1965, P.A. 448, S. 42; P.A. 82-223, S. 29; P.A. 83-577, S. 33.)

History: 1965 act deleted the word “wilfully” before “fails to obey the signal,” added the words “pedestrian control, sign, signal, marking or device” and substituted reference to the penalty in Sec. 14-296 for a specific penalty of not less than $2 nor more than $25; P.A. 82-223 specified that violation of the section constituted an infraction and replaced the penalty provision with minimum and maximum fine amounts; P.A. 83-577 increased the minimum fine from $25 to $35.

See Sec. 14-300 re crosswalks, regulation of pedestrian traffic, etc.

Pedestrian standing in street awaiting approach of trolley car and not looking for 1 minute in direction from which an automobile was approaching held not necessarily negligent under statute; question of fact for jury. 99 C. 2; Id., 11. Not necessary to charge as to full terms and effect of statute when so much of statute as was applicable was explained in charge on contributory negligence. 103 C. 552. As regards negligence, statute establishes no other standards than those of the common law. 116 C. 53; 127 C. 159; 128 C. 584. Cited. 144 C. 449; 239 C. 235.

Cited. 39 CA 579.

Interest of state in enforcing its traffic laws outweighs defendant's interest in stopping traffic to distribute literature; terms “negligent” and “reckless” have precise legal definition. 33 CS 725.

Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 584.