Paul and Dan are in a car accident when Dan runs a red light and hits Paul's car crossing the intersection. Paul was not wearing his seatbelt and expert testimony at trial was that Paul's injuries are 30 percent worse than they would have been if he had been wearing his seatbelt. Which of the following is true?

Question 6 options:

a)

Under comparative negligence, a jury may reduce Paul's damages by 30 percent.

b)

Under comparative negligence, a jury may not reduce Paul's damages by 30 percent because his failure to wear a seatbelt is not the actual or proximate cause of his harm.

c)

Under contributory negligence, a jury may reduce Paul's damages by 30 percent.

d)

Under contributory negligence, Paul does not recover anything.