October 7, 2026 · By John C. Hubbard, Attorney
Fault in an Alabama car wreck is usually decided by one of about fifteen sections of the Rules of the Road, Title 32, Chapter 5A of the Alabama Code. The insurance adjuster has already decided which one applies to you before the first phone call. Knowing which statute governs your wreck, and what a violation of it actually proves, tells you how strong your claim is and what the other side will argue.
Does breaking a traffic law automatically make a driver liable?
No, and the distinction matters. Alabama treats the violation of some traffic statutes as negligence per se, meaning the violation itself establishes that the driver breached a duty and the only remaining questions are causation and damages. Other statutes are treated as evidence of negligence that the jury weighs with everything else. The Alabama Supreme Court has held that violating the left turn statute may be negligence per se (Osborne Truck Lines v. Langston, 454 So. 2d 1317 (Ala. 1984)), and that following too closely can be negligence as a matter of law (Cox v. Miller, 361 So. 2d 1044 (Ala. 1978)). It has also held that violating the lane statute is not negligence per se (Consolidated Freightways v. Pacheco-Rivera, 524 So. 2d 346 (Ala. 1988); Blakley v. Johnson, 80 So. 3d 250 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010)). A federal court in Montgomery treated improper backing as prima facie negligence and as evidence that could support wantonness (Stafford v. Sunland Distribution, M.D. Ala. 2021). Either way, the violation has to have caused the wreck. A driver who was speeding but got hit by someone running a red light has not lost the case because of the speed.
The statutes that decide most Birmingham wrecks
Speed reasonable for conditions, § 32-5A-170. No one may drive faster than is reasonable and prudent for the weather, the road and the traffic, regardless of the posted limit. This is the statute in rain, fog and construction zone cases, and the one that lets a jury find a driver negligent at 55 in a 55.
Following too closely, § 32-5A-89 and § 32-5-56. The rear end collision statute. A driver who hits the car in front is presumed to have been following too closely or not paying attention, and the Supreme Court has allowed that violation to establish negligence as a matter of law. The usual defense is that the lead car stopped suddenly without reason; it rarely works, because Alabama drivers are expected to anticipate that traffic ahead can stop at any time (Hathcock v. Wood).
Left turns, § 32-5A-111. A driver turning left at an intersection or into a driveway must yield to oncoming traffic. This is the statute in most motorcycle cases and in the “I never saw him” wreck. A hand signal or a turn signal does not relieve the turning driver of the duty to make sure the turn can be made safely (Pell v. Tidwell, 139 So. 3d 165 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013)).
Entering the road from a driveway or parking lot, § 32-5A-114. A driver pulling out from anywhere other than another road must yield to everyone already on the road. When the other driver violated this statute, the Court of Civil Appeals has held the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent for being where the law entitled her to be (Bergob v. Scrushy, 855 So. 2d 523 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002)).
Stop signs and yield signs, § 32-5A-112. The right of way at a controlled intersection. The dispute in these cases is almost always factual, who had the sign and who stopped, which is why the intersection camera matters more than the police report.
Lane changes, § 32-5A-88. A driver must stay in a single lane and may not move from it until it is safe. Because a violation is only evidence of negligence rather than negligence per se, these are the cases where the defense works hardest to shift fault, and where a dash cam decides the outcome.
No passing zones and divided highways, §§ 32-5A-86 and 32-5A-90. Crossing a double yellow line or driving on the wrong side of a divided highway. In Campbell v. Kennedy, 275 So. 3d 507 (Ala. 2018), the Supreme Court affirmed a verdict in a construction zone wreck where the evidence conflicted on whether the plaintiff crossed the line to pass a motor grader that was not displaying its lights.
Racing, § 32-5A-178, and driving too slowly, § 32-5A-174. Racing on a public road is evidence of contributory negligence against a plaintiff who was doing it (Sparks v. Alabama Power, 679 So. 2d 678 (Ala. 1996)). Impeding traffic by driving too slowly is also a violation, and the minimum speed statute can be charged to the jury.
Emergency vehicles, §§ 32-5A-7 and 32-5A-115. Police and fire vehicles responding to a call may exceed the limit and run signals with due regard for others, and every other driver must pull to the right and stop. Claims arising from a police pursuit run into immunity: the Supreme Court found no substantial evidence that an officer’s high speed pursuit was unreasonable in Ex parte Brown, 182 So. 3d 495 (Ala. 2015), and held an officer running a red light had immunity in Ex parte City of Montgomery, 272 So. 3d 155 (Ala. 2018).
Pedestrians, §§ 32-5A-211, 212, 213 and 215. Pedestrians have the right of way in marked and unmarked crosswalks at intersections, must yield everywhere else, must walk on the sidewalk or facing traffic on the shoulder, and every driver must use due care to avoid hitting them. The Supreme Court held in 2024 that the crosswalk statute gave no right of way to a man pushing a stalled car in a median turn lane (Virgo v. Roberts, 401 So. 3d 263 (Ala. 2024)). See the firm’s pedestrian and bicycle accident page.
Why this matters more in Alabama than anywhere else
Because of contributory negligence. In most states, a plaintiff who violated one of these statutes loses a percentage of the award. In Alabama, if the jury finds the violation contributed to the wreck, the plaintiff recovers nothing. So the same statutes that prove the other driver’s fault are the ones the insurer will try to turn on you. The defendant has to prove it, the violation has to have caused the wreck, and the statutes do not apply to wanton conduct such as drunk driving, but the adjuster’s first recorded question is aimed at finding one. Do not answer it without a lawyer.
Self-driving cars
Alabama enacted rules for automated vehicles effective October 1, 2024 (Ala. Code §§ 32-9B-1 and 32-9C-1). The statutes set the conditions under which a vehicle may operate without a human driver and provide that liability for a wreck involving one is decided under ordinary state, federal and common law. In practice that means the same Rules of the Road apply, and the question becomes who or what was driving.
What to send the firm
The crash report, which lists the statute the officer believed was violated, and any citation issued to either driver. A citation against the other driver helps; one against you is not the end of the claim, because the officer was not there and the report is not admissible in court. The review is free and there is no attorney’s fee unless money is recovered. Alabama 205-378-8121. Se habla español.
Related guides
- Disputed liability wrecks: how fault gets proven
- Contributory negligence in Alabama
- What to do after a car accident in Birmingham
- Injured as a passenger in Alabama
Practice pages: car wreck lawyer, truck wreck lawyer, Birmingham personal injury lawyer.
This post is general information about Alabama law, not legal advice, and contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. No representation is made that the quality of legal services is greater than that of other lawyers.