Four systems, and Ohio uses the more common threshold
American fault law splits into four real categories: pure comparative negligence, modified comparative negligence with a 50% bar, modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar, and pure contributory negligence. Ohio uses the 51% bar under ORC § 2315.33 — the more typical of the two modified thresholds nationally.
Where Ohio genuinely stands apart: who counts in the comparison
Here's Ohio's real point of distinction. Rather than simply comparing the plaintiff's fault to the fault of whichever defendants happen to be named in the lawsuit, ORC § 2315.33 explicitly folds in the combined tortious conduct of all other persons — including those the plaintiff does not even seek recovery from in that particular action. This widens the comparison beyond the named parties in a way that most other 51%-bar states don't spell out as explicitly.
The stricter alternative: a 50% bar
A smaller group of about 12 states, including Georgia and Kansas, use a stricter version: recovery is barred the moment the claimant's fault is equal to the defendant's, not only when it exceeds it.
Pure comparative negligence and contributory negligence: the two extremes
At the more forgiving end of the spectrum, pure comparative negligence states like California never bar recovery for ordinary fault at all. At the far stricter end, the five contributory negligence jurisdictions — Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and DC — bar recovery entirely for any fault, even 1%. See our guide to the other states using a 51% bar for Ohio's closest peer group nationally.