City laws and ordinance I'm trying to find out if the city of Oklahoma has the right to tow my car out of my drive way even if it's not in running condition
Yes, it can do that. A city can constitutionally ban having an inoperable vehicle in your privately owned driveway, and can remedy a violation of its city ordinance by towing the vehicle, after providing you with the due process steps outlined in the ordinance below. The relevant municipal ordinance is as follows: ARTICLE II. - ABANDONED, WRECKED, ETC., VEHICLES § 35-36. - Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: (1) Junk vehicle means any vehicle, as defined herein, which is wrecked, dismantled, partially dismantled, inoperative, deteriorated, decayed, lacks necessary repairs or maintenance, abandoned, bearing no State license plate or bearing a State license plate that is more than three months out of date, or discarded. (2) Vehicle means a device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices designed to be moved by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks, the term shall include, but not be limited to, automobiles, buses, motorbikes, motorcycles, motor scooters, trucks, tractors, go-carts, golf carts, boats and trailers. (3) Owner means any person, firm, or corporation having a legal or equitable interest in the property, including an officer, guardian, executor, administrator, mortgagee in possession, managing or leasing agent of such person, firm, or corporation. (4) Private property means any real property which is not public property. (5) Public property means that property which is dedicated to the public use and over which the Federal, State or municipal government or any political subdivision thereof exercises control and dominion. § 35-37. - Prohibited; nuisance declared. (a) It shall be unlawful and an offense for any person to park, store, leave, or permit the parking, storing, or leaving of any vehicle of any kind which is in an abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, inoperative, rusted, junked, or partially dismantled condition whether attended or not, upon any public or private property within the City for a period of time in excess of 72 hours. The presence of an abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, inoperative, rusted, junked or partially dismantled vehicle or parts thereof on private or public property is hereby declared a public nuisance which may be abated as such in accordance with the provisions of this article. (b) The provisions of Subsection (a) shall not apply to any vehicle enclosed within a building on private property or to any vehicle held in connection with a lawful business enterprise, and property operated in the appropriate zone, pursuant to the zoning ordinance or to any vehicle in operable condition specifically adopted or designed for operation on drag strips or raceways or any vehicle retained by the owner for antique collection purposes in a storage place in an enclosed building on private property maintained in a lawful place and manner. § 35-38. - Order of abatement. In all cases where it shall have been determined that any nuisance shall be abated, and the nuisance is not abated within the time specified in the notice, an order of abatement shall be entered by the Director or designee who shall assign a value to the vehicle and cause the vehicle or its parts to be removed and stored in a proper place for not more than 30 days. § 35-39. - Responsibility for removal. (a) Upon proper notice and opportunity to be heard, the owner of the private property on which the abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicle is located, shall be responsible for its removal. In the event of removal and disposition by the City or its designee, the owner of the private property where the vehicle is located shall be liable for the expenses incurred. (b) The owner of any vehicle so removed may regain possession thereof by making application to The Department of Neighborhood Services within 30 days after its removal. The owner shall pay the designated wrecker service all reasonable costs of towing and storage liens which shall have accrued to such vehicle. If the vehicle is not reclaimed within 30 days, it may be sold without further notice from the City. § 35-40. - Notice to remove. (a) The City Manager, the Director or designee, shall give notice of removal to the owner of the private property where a nuisance as defined by this article is located. At least ten days notice shall be given to the owner of the property by mail at the address shown by the current year's tax rolls in the county treasurer's office before the City takes action. It shall constitute sufficient notice, when at the time of mailing of the notice to the property owner, the Director shall obtain a receipt of mailing from the postal service, which receipt shall indicate the date of mailing and the name and address of the mailee and if such person or entity cannot be found, then a copy of the notice may be served by posting a copy in some conspicuous place on the premises upon which the vehicle is located, at least ten days prior to any abatement action by the enforcement official. (b) The notice shall order the property owner to abate the nuisance and shall further state that unless such abatement is performed within ten days of the date of the notice, the nuisance may be abated by the City. § 35-41. - Hearing. (a) The owner may give written consent authorizing the City to abate the nuisance under Section 35-42 hereof. Such consent shall waive the right to a hearing under Subsection (c) hereof. (b) At any time within ten days from the date of the notice and order provided for in this article, the owner may request, in writing to the Director, a hearing to be conducted for the purpose of contesting the determination that a nuisance exists upon his property. The Director shall conduct such hearing as soon as may be practicable but not earlier than five days after receipt of the owner's request for such hearing, and not later than 15 days after such receipt. (c) At such hearing, such owner shall have the right to be represented by counsel, to present testimony, or evidence and arguments, and to cross examine witnesses. All testimony shall be taken under oath. If the Director, after such hearing, shall determine that the inoperative vehicle or junked vehicle constitutes a growing blight or a substantial detriment to health and safety of the residents of our community, he/she shall file, in writing, findings of fact, and order that such nuisance be abated within ten days, and shall cause such finding and order to be served upon such owner at the conclusion of the hearing. § 35-42. - Removal of motor vehicles from property. If the violation described in the notice served pursuant to this article has not been remedied within the ten-day period of compliance, or in the event that a notice requesting a hearing has not been timely filed, and the existence of the violation is affirmed by the Director, then the City Manager, Director or designee may continue to recommend prosecution of criminal charges on a daily basis for failure to abate the nuisance and/or shall have the right to take possession of the inoperative or junked vehicle and remove it from the premises. It shall be unlawful for any person to interfere, hinder, or to refuse to allow such person or persons to enter upon private property for the purpose of removing a vehicle under the provisions of this article. § 35-46. - Collection of City's costs of removal. (a) Upon the failure of the owner or occupant of property from which abandoned vehicles have been removed by the City to pay the unrecovered expense incurred by the City in such removal, the amount of the unrecovered cost may be added to the municipal utility bills of the private property from which removed and recovered in the same manner as such bills. (b) If the private property is not served by municipal utilities or if collection efforts are not successful, the cost may be certified by the City Clerk to the county treasurer of the county in which the property is located who shall add the same to the ad valorem taxes assessed against the property, until paid, and such costs shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem taxes assessed against the property, and when collected shall be paid to the City. § 35-47. - Penalty. In addition to the procedures for removal of vehicles, any person who shall violate any of the provisions hereof shall, upon conviction, be deemed guilty of a Class "b" offense against the City. Each act in violation of any of the provisions hereof shall constitute a separate offense and may be chargeable as such. Each day's continued violation of any of the provisions hereof shall constitute a separate offense and may be chargeable as such. This statute has stayed on the books for roughly fifty years without being struck down for being illegal or unconstitutional, and many municipalities have similar ordinances.
Very few terms have a single "legal" definition or meaning that applies to all laws, and can be looked up as if in a dictionary. Rather, when a specific meaning is needed in connection with a particular law, that law will include a definition. But that definition will often not apply to the use of the same term in other laws or other contexts. Here I suspect that the OP has found the definition section of a US Federal law regulating commercial transport in interstate commerce. Obviously in such a law, those terms would be defined in the context of commercial transport. That does not mean that the same meanings will be applied in other laws. Driver's licenses and other traffic and motor vehicle regulations are largely matters of state law in the US. Definitions from a federal law, or indeed any law but that state's Motor Vehicle Code (or whatever a given state calls such a body of law) will simply not be relevant. The argument sketched in the question simply does not follow.
A &quot;police car&quot; doesn't necessarily have a special legal status, so a police officer can theoretically drive a beat-up pickup truck and &quot;be legal&quot; (but not in Washington, see below). What matters is whether others have to give special attention to the vehicle. The pertinent question is, what are the requirements for being an authorized emergency vehicle. I'll give you Washington state law, and you can apply this to other states fairly easily. RCW 46.37.190(1) mandates that Every authorized emergency vehicle shall, in addition to any other equipment and distinctive marking required by this chapter, be equipped with at least one lamp capable of displaying a red light visible from at least five hundred feet in normal sunlight and a siren capable of giving an audible signal. (3) Vehicles operated by public agencies whose law enforcement duties include the authority to stop and detain motor vehicles on the public highways of the state may be equipped with a siren and lights of a color and type designated by the state patrol for that purpose. The state patrol may prohibit the use of these sirens and lights on vehicles other than the vehicles described in this subsection. Given these restrictions, a driver knows whether they must get out of the way, and whether they have to &quot;pull over&quot; (stop driving and get ready for a brief traffic detention). The manner of attachment of &quot;stuff&quot; on the outside of the vehicle falls under general state patrol safety rules, whereby for example you can't balance a rocking chair on the roof and speed down the highway. The state patrol has reasonable discretion to deem that a particular mode of attachment is &quot;unsafe&quot; – this won't be like building-code minutia. Duck tape would probably be deemed to be an insecure means of attachment. There can be some statutory provisions regarding use of private vehicles, for example RCW 46.37.185 allows green lights on firefighter's private care: Firefighters, when approved by the chief of their respective service, shall be authorized to use a green light on the front of their private cars when on emergency duty only. Such green light shall be visible for a distance of two hundred feet under normal atmospheric conditions and shall be of a type and mounting approved by the Washington state patrol. The use of the green light shall only be for the purpose of identification and the operator of a vehicle so equipped shall not be entitled to any of the privileges provided in RCW 46.61.035 for the operators of authorized emergency vehicles. Flashing blue lights are prohibited by WAC 204-21-230(c)(4) &quot;other than a law enforcement vehicle as defined in WAC 204-21-020&quot;, which is &quot;a publicly owned or leased vehicle operated by a law enforcement agency and which is used for the law enforcement functions of the agency&quot;. That means that in Washington, the town sheriff cannot use his personal car as a law enforcement vehicle. I expect there to be some variation on that point across the US. The lights-and-sirens law is what keeps ordinary people from putting lights and sirens on their vehicles.
Ask the local government to enforce the littering ordinances against customers. But, if the trash is put in trash cans and blows out, there is little that you can do legally. In the law there are some bad things that happen for which someone is legally responsible due to their fault or circumstances, but there are many bad things that fall in the category of &quot;shit happens&quot; and for the most part, this is one of them.
The only really authoritative source of answers is a court interpreting the laws on an as applied basis (and there are many U.S. traffic laws, one in every state and sometimes additional local ones, not a single U.S. traffic law). An answer from a government official or police department is not authoritative, although it may be informative of how the official in question would enforce the law.
No, it is generally not legal. In most (maybe all) states, this would be vandalism. For example, see California Penal Code Section 594(1)(a): Every person who maliciously commits any of the following acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of vandalism: (1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material. (2) Damages. (3) Destroys. For another example, see Kansas Statutes 21-5813. In your hypothetical, the pedestrian absolutely hit the vehicle, not the other way around, so the "fine line" you mention doesn't effect this conclusion. The practicality of proving the case against the pedestrian is a separate matter but the law favours neither the pedestrian nor the driver. The standard is the same no matter who the charges are filed against: proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, I am unfamiliar with the jurisdiction I demand you give me your hat! You're not going to, are you? The point of that is that you are not obliged to do anything just because someone demands that you do. Now, if I had a court order that required you to give me your hat ... It appears that there is some confusion over who owns some land in Nebraska. This is a problem; it is not your problem. From my understanding which is entirely based on this: A warranty deed is a type of deed where the grantor (seller) guarantees that he or she holds clear title to a piece of real estate and has a right to sell it to the grantee (buyer). you would be extremely unwise to sign such a deed since it is in no way clear that you (or anyone) does have clear title. Now I take it that you are not interested in owning land in Nebraska and even less interested in getting into a legal battle over it. If that is the case then I suggest that you consult a local lawyer and ask for his advice on the following plan of action: You and your wife will renounce any claim that you may have if: You do not guarantee that you have any claim or title, The person to whom you are making this grant indemnifies you against any legal action that may result, They will prepare the documents, Your lawyer will review them, They will reimburse you for your lawyer's fees. Come back and tell us how this works out. Edit to address subsequent questions Can you be responsible for costs? Well, anything is possible but it would be extremely unlikely. If there was any wrongdoing it was many years ago by someone else! If you approach this in a reasonable way and attempt to assist in reaching a resolution (so long as it doesn't cost you time or money) then it is highly unlikely a court would award costs against you. What about background checks? This would be a civil case. It would not appear in your criminal history. While it is a matter of public record all it really means is that you and someone else had a dispute that required a court to settle; happens all the time.
Colorado statute 42-6-206 imposes disclosure requirements on the sale of vehicles with salvage titles. That you didn't know it was a salvage does not seem to be of concern to this particular statute. This means that you are potentially entitled to redress against the people who sold you the car as well, provided the sale occurred in Colorado and they failed to disclose it to you (i.e., you didn't just forget about it in the intervening years). Given the presence of a law specifically covering your circumstances, it may be worth consulting with a local attorney to see what your obligations are. There may be mitigating circumstances, but they are not currently obvious to me if they're there. (conventional wisdom in the industry is that all private sales are "as-is" with no implied warranty of merchantibility and no recourse for a buyer who doesn't do due diligence -- I was shocked to find a statute specifically protecting buyers of salvage vehicles)