164k views
0 votes
Davis throws a dagger at Smith, intending to kill Smith. However, the dagger misses Smith and strikes the hat on Potter's head. The dagger does not make contact with Potter's body. Unharmed but finding the whole thing offensive, Potter sues Davis for battery. Which of the following is most true?

A. Davis is not liable because Potter did not suffer any physical harm.
B. Davis is liable to Potter for battery.
C. Davis is liable to Potter for negligence.
D. Davis is not liable because he did not intend to make contact with Potter.

User Nojetlag
by
5.8k points

2 Answers

4 votes

Final answer:

Davis is not liable for battery, as the intent was directed at Smith and the dagger did not make contact with Potter's body.

Step-by-step explanation:

The student asked whether Davis is liable to Potter for battery when Davis threw a dagger with the intention to kill Smith, but instead, the dagger struck Potter's hat without making contact with Potter's body. The most correct answer is D. Davis is not liable because he did not intend to make contact with Potter. To establish liability for battery, one must intend to cause harmful or offensive contact with the person of another or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and harmful or offensive contact with the person of another directly or indirectly results. Since the dagger did not make contact with Potter's body, no battery occurred, and Davis's intent was directed at Smith, not Potter. However, this does not preclude other potential claims Potter might have, such as for assault, if Potter was in apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact.

User Error
by
6.8k points
1 vote

Answer:

Davis is liable for Potter for battery

Explanation:

Devi's is liable of Potter for battery because the law of doctrine of transferred for intent in which a person intends to hit the person but the miss the chance and hit another person. So according to the tort of law when a person hits and misses the chance but another person got hit by chance then the person who hits are liable for it. Potter can sue Davis for battery because it hits Potter. And it also remembers that the hat which potter was wearing was considered to be a part of Potter and that is enough to constitute the battery.

User Sofiaguyang
by
6.8k points