Colorado § 43-5-301 - Obstructing highway - penalty.

§ 43-5-301. Obstructing highway - penalty.

No person or corporation shall erect any fence, house, or other structure or dig pits or holes in or upon any highway, or place thereon or cause or allow to be placed thereon any stones, timber, or trees or any obstruction whatsoever. No person or corporation shall tear down, burn, or otherwise damage any bridge of any highway, or cause wastewater or the water from any ditch, road, drain, flume, agricultural crop sprinkler system, or other source to flow or fall upon any road or highway so as to damage the same or to cause a hazard to vehicular traffic. Any person or corporation so offending commits a civil infraction and shall also be liable to any person, unit of government, or corporation in a civil action for any damages resulting therefrom.

Source: L. 1883: p. 261, § 36. G.S. § 2988. L. 1885: p. 325, § 1. R.S. 08: § 5826. C.L. § 1280. CSA: C. 143, § 34. CRS 53: § 120-4-1. C.R.S. 1963: § 120-4-1. L. 81: Entire section amended, p. 1775, § 2, effective July 1. L. 2021: Entire section amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3326, § 780, effective March 1, 2022.

Cross references: For damaging road, ditch, or flume, see § 7-42-109; for the penalty for cutting or breaking ditch or flume, see § 37-89-101; for obstructing highway or other passageway, see § 18-9-107; for the penalty for a civil infraction, see § 18-1.3-503.

ANNOTATION

This section makes it a criminal offense for anyone to obstruct a public highway. Sprague v. Stead, 56 Colo. 538, 139 P. 544 (1914).

Section does not prohibit court instruction in negligence action. The fact that this section makes it a criminal act to place an obstruction on the highway does not prohibit a court in a negligence action from instructing on the common-law doctrine that one who moves an obstruction into someone else's path and thus creates a hazard to another must either remove the obstruction or warn others of the hazard if he has a reasonable time and opportunity to do so. Kirkham v. Hickerson Bros. Truck Co., 162 Colo. 125, 425 P.2d 34 (1967).

Absent negligence, seepage from ditch injuring highway not actionable. Considering that to violate any of the provisions requires active causation, that the construction of ditches is a lawful enterprise, especially authorized by statute, that under other statutes the owner of a ditch is not liable for injuries to land by seepage, it was held that injury to a public highway by seepage from a ditch gives no action, unless negligence is shown. Bridgeford v. Colo. Fuel & Iron Co., 63 Colo. 372, 167 P. 963 (1917).

Farmer took reasonable measures to prevent obstruction of road when moving agricultural sprinklers and, in light of the special consideration given to the movement of implements of husbandry by state law, there was no violation of this section. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Logan County v. Vandemoer, 205 P.3d 423 (Colo. App. 2008).