§291C-26  Authorized emergency vehicles.  (a)  The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm and vehicles used by police officers while in the performance of a police function, may exercise the privileges set forth in this section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

     (b)  The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:

     (1)  Park or stand irrespective of the provisions of this chapter;

     (2)  Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation;

     (3)  Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as the driver does not endanger life or property;

     (4)  Disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in specified directions;

     (5)  Drive on the shoulder and median of roadways; and

     (6)  Drive in controlled-access roadways, highways, and facilities.

     (c)  The exemptions granted in subsection (b) to an authorized emergency vehicle shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of authorized audible and visual signals; provided that use of an authorized audible signal shall not be required if it is not reasonably necessary under the circumstances.  This subsection shall not apply to police vehicles.

     (d)  The foregoing provisions shall not relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons, nor shall those provisions protect the driver from the consequences of the driver's reckless disregard for the safety of others. [L 1971, c 150, pt of §1; gen ch 1985; am L 2002, c 93, §1; am L 2003, c 112, §2; am L 2023, c 16, §2]

Case Notes

  Where circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant police officer as to liability for motor vehicle accident allegedly caused by defendant's negligence while pursuing another vehicle to issue a traffic citation, circuit court erred in applying the doctrine of conditional privilege, which would preclude liability of an official absent a showing of malice.  The specialized negligence duty of care under this section, which focuses on what a reasonably prudent emergency vehicle driver would have done under the circumstances presented, supersedes and takes precedence over any conditional privilege, at common law or otherwise, that may apply to defendant under the circumstances of the case.  138 H. 518 (App.), 382 P.3d 330 (2016).