Which condition applies to partial comparative negligence?

Partial comparative negligence allows a plaintiff to recover damages even if they are found to be partially at fault, as long as their degree of negligence is less than that of the defendant. This approach compares the fault of both parties involved in the incident. If the plaintiff's negligence is determined to be less than the defendant's, the plaintiff is entitled to a recovery that is reduced by their percentage of fault.

This concept is integral in jurisdictions that follow partial comparative negligence rules, distinguishing it from pure comparative negligence which allows recovery regardless of whether the plaintiff is at fault, and from contributory negligence where any degree of fault by the plaintiff bars recovery. Hence, the condition that the plaintiff's negligence must be less than the defendant's aligns accurately with the principles of partial comparative negligence.

The other options do not describe the nuances of partial comparative negligence correctly. For instance, the notion that there is no recovery if the plaintiff is at all negligent misrepresents the essence of partial comparative negligence, as it allows some recovery based on the comparative levels of fault. Similarly, stating the plaintiff can recover any amount regardless of negligence does not hold true, as the recovery would still be contingent upon the fault percentages. Lastly, the application of partial comparative negligence does not exclusively pertain to