Assume that the plaintiff was 60 percent responsible for his own injuries. He would be able to recover the 40 percent of his injuries caused by the negligent defendant if the state that hears the case follows the doctrine of negligence. a. Contributory b. Modified comparative faultc. Pure comparative fault d. Situs

The correct answer is the option C: Pure comparative fault.

Explanation:

To begin with, Comparative Negligence is an approach of the Contributory Negligence that is adopted nowadays by most of the states and that focuses in the amount of fault of each party when it comes to determines who's negligence was the one that caused the injuries. Moreover, this type of approach has two other more different approaches, that are pure comparative and modified comparative.

To continue, ''pure comparative negligence'' allows parties to collect for damages even when they are more than 50 percent responsible for the injury, however the amount of damages is limited by the party's actual degree of fault. Meanwhile the modifed comparative negligence only recognizes the recover of the damages when they are less than the 50 percent responsible of the injury. That is why if the state that hears the case follows the doctrine of the pure comparative negligence then the plaintiff will be able to recover the 40 percent of the injuries by the negligent defendant, even thought if he was 60 percent responsible.

idk the answer to this question