2021 Colorado Code
Title 42 - Vehicles and Traffic
Article 4 - Regulation of Vehicles and Traffic
Part 7 - Rights-of-Way
§ 42-4-701. Vehicles Approaching or Entering Intersection

1. When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection from different highways at approximately the same time, the driver of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right.
2. The foregoing rule is modified at through highways and otherwise as stated in sections 42-4-702 to 42-4-704.
3. Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction.

History. Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2346, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.

This title was numbered as numerous articles within chapter 13, C.R.S. 1963. The provisions of this title were amended with relocations in 1994, effective January 1, 1995, resulting in the addition, relocation, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. For amendments to this title prior to 1994, consult the Colorado statutory research explanatory note and the table itemizing the replacement volumes and supplements to the original volume of C.R.S. 1973 beginning on page vii in the front of this volume. Former C.R.S. section numbers are shown in editor's notes following those sections that were relocated. For a detailed comparison of this title, see the comparative tables located in the back of the index.

For the provisions providing for the manufacture of license plates and highway signs by state correctional facilities, see article 24 of title 17; for registration and use of snowmobiles, see article 14 of title 33; for the regulation of commercial driving schools, see article 2 of this title; for provisions relating to highway safety, see article 5 of title 43; for licensing and regulation of automobile dealers, see part 1 of article 20 of title 44; for the antimonopoly financing law, see part 2 of article 20 of title 44; for the Sunday closing law, see part 3 of article 20 of title 44.

For exemption of members of the military forces from traffic regulation, see § 28-3-504 ; for disposition of fines and penalties under this article, see § 42-1-217 ; for crimes that involve the operation of motor vehicles, also see §§ 18-3-106 , 18-3-205 , 18-4-409 , 18-4-512 , 18-9-107 , and 18-9-114 to 18-9-116.5 .

For penalties for class A and class B traffic infractions, see § 42-4-1701 (3)(a)(I) .

This section is similar to former § 42-4-601 as it existed prior to 1994, and the former § 42-4-701 was relocated to § 42-4-801 .

Law reviews. For article, “Scope of the Right-of-Way Privilege”, see 19 Dicta 122.

Annotator's note. Since § 42-4-701 is similar to § 42-4-601 as it existed prior to the 1994 amending of title 42 as enacted by SB 94-1, relevant cases construing that provision have been included with the annotations to this section.

State law does not take away city's power to regulate traffic. If a city has power under the state constitution to pass ordinances regulating vehicular traffic upon its streets, it cannot be deprived of that power by the passage of a state law. And if there is a conflict between statute and ordinance the ordinance controls. City County of Denver v. Henry, 95 Colo. 582 , 38 P.2d 895 (1934); Brown v. Maier, 96 Colo. 1 , 38 P.2d 905 (1934); Thomasson v. Burlington Transp. Co., 128 F.2d 355 (10th Cir. 1942).

Question of contributory negligence measured by requirements of city ordinance. Thus, in action for injuries sustained in automobile accident at an intersection, the question of plaintiff's contributory negligence must be measured by the requirements of the city ordinance relating to right-of-way at intersections and not by this section, where there was a conflict. Thomasson v. Burlington Transp. Co., 128 F.2d 355 (10th Cir. 1942).

Insufficient evidence to charge contributory negligence. To properly apply the “look but not see” rule, as a matter of law, it is elemental that the approaching vehicle must be plainly visible and that the view of it must be unobstructed. If the evidence on these points is not clear or is disputed, then it remains a fact question for the trier of the facts to resolve. The effect of these findings by the trial court is that the evidence was insufficient to charge the defendant with contributory negligence when plaintiff negligently failed to yield right-of-way. Hernandez v. Ratliff, 172 Colo. 129 , 470 P.2d 579 (1970).

Need not yield right-of-way to one already at fault. A driver cannot be required to yield the right-of-way when his inability to know and act is chargeable to the lawless conduct of him who claims it. Boyd v. Close, 82 Colo. 150 , 257 P. 1079 (1927); Andrus v. Hall, 93 Colo. 526 , 27 P.2d 495 (1933).

One having right-of-way must still use reasonable care. Prentiss v. Johnston, 119 Colo. 370 , 203 P.2d 733 (1949).

Violation is question for jury. Whether or not either of the drivers or both were negligent in violating this section and whether said negligence was the proximate cause of this accident, or whether it was caused by the joint and concurrent negligence of both, are questions of fact for the jury to determine. Amos v. Remington Arms Co., 117 Colo. 399 , 188 P.2d 896 (1948).

Applied in Lorenzini v. Rucker, 95 Colo. 246 , 35 P.2d 865 (1934).