Assume that 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 which hears the case follows the doctrine of.

pure comparative (fault) negligence

Explanation:

No matter how sad and bitter it is to say, but people are involve in one way or another to accidents everyday. And many people are not willing to take the responsibility for it and this is when the doctrine of negligence comes into play.

When a plaintiff has a fault which is little compared to the defendant in the accident just like in the question, the doctrine of pure comparative (fault) negligence is been used. But, when the plaintiff has the same fault that is equal fault with the defendant in the accident, the doctrine of Modified Comparative Negligence is been used instead.

can you explain a little further maybe give multiple choice? ?

i think you really need to revive you answer! : d