What does "comparative negligence" refer to in Texas law?

Comparative negligence in Texas law refers to a legal doctrine that reduces a plaintiff's recovery for damages based on their own percentage of fault in causing the injury or damage. This means that if a plaintiff is found to be partially at fault for the incident, their compensation will be decreased in proportion to their percentage of fault.

For example, if a jury finds that a plaintiff was 30% responsible for their injury and the total damages amount to $100,000, the plaintiff would only be able to recover $70,000. This system encourages personal responsibility and ensures that damages are awarded based on the degree of fault from each party involved in the accident or incident.

The other options do not accurately describe comparative negligence. The idea of equally apportioning fault among parties does not account for the specific percentage of fault attributed to each party, which is a critical aspect of comparative negligence. Full recovery regardless of fault conflicts with the principle that a plaintiff's compensation should reflect their responsibility in the situation. Finally, while settling disputes out of court is a method of resolving legal issues, it is not related to the concept of comparative negligence, which specifically addresses the assignment of fault and its impact on recovery in tort claims.