## Facts

- Henry A. Corey was driving slowly in a horse-drawn wagon on a public street.
- Lud C. Havener and A.L. Adams each operated a motor tricycle with a gasoline engine.
- The defendants approached from behind and passed Corey at a high rate of speed, one on each side, making loud noise and emitting steam.
- Corey’s horse shied; Corey lost control and the wagon wheel struck another wagon.
- Corey suffered personal injury and property damage.
- A jury found both defendants negligent and found their conduct contributed to the accident.

## Issues

1. Whether each of two independent negligent actors may be held liable for an indivisible injury when there was no concerted action and the precise causal share of each cannot be determined.
2. Whether a plaintiff may sue such contributing tortfeasors separately and obtain judgment against each for the full amount of damages, subject to the rule that the injury may be satisfied only once.
3. Whether the trial judge erred by refusing instructions requiring the plaintiff to identify which defendant caused the horse to shy and limiting damages to prevent alleged double recovery.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts overruled the defendants’ exceptions and affirmed the judgments for Corey in both actions.
- The court held that lack of concert between defendants did not bar liability where each contributed to the injury.
- The court held that defendants who contribute to a single injury may be sued jointly or severally.
- The court held that in separate actions the plaintiff may obtain judgment against each defendant for the full amount, although the plaintiff is entitled to only one satisfaction.
- The court found no error in refusing the requested jury instructions; the charge actually given was presumed correct because it was not included in the bill of exceptions.

## Legal Principles

- When multiple wrongdoers each contribute to a single injury, each is liable even if there was no concerted action and apportionment of causal contribution is not possible.
- Contributing tortfeasors may be sued jointly or in separate actions at the plaintiff’s election.
- In separate actions, judgment may enter against each defendant for the full amount of damages, but the plaintiff may collect only one full satisfaction.
- On appellate review of refused instructions, when the record does not include the full jury charge, the reviewing court presumes the instructions given were appropriate and correct.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed full judgments against each defendant because the jury found both negligently contributed to a single injury; the plaintiff could sue them separately and obtain full judgments against each, limited by the rule that the loss may be satisfied only once.


Corey v. Havener, 182 Mass. 250 (1902)