One element of tort liability is intent. What is intent? For instance, if I get angry and intend to hit the wall, but someone happens to walk by and I hit them instead, is the element of intent fulfilled? Why or why not? Thoughts?

An intentional tort is regarded as a group or category of torts that evaluates a civil wrong emerging from an intentional doing on the part of the tortfeasor also known as the alleged wrongdoer. Relying on the exact tort alleged; either general or specific intent will typically require approval. In any tort attack, battery infliction of mental suffering damages awarded in tort issues when the plan is proven is strategically more prominent and more successful than negligence cases (Moore, 2011). In such scenarios, the plaintiff charging the defendant with intentional tort ought to prove that the defendant operated knowingly when carrying out the assault and that the attack could possess damaging results. In this case, hitting a passerby is an intentional act, and it ensures that the element of intent is fulfilled. As described earlier, this is an assault that resulted from a deliberate operation on the part of the wrongdoer hence meets the component of the plan.

References

Moore, N. J. (2011). Intent and Consent in the Tort of Battery: Confusion and Controversy. Am. UL Rev., 61, 1585.