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.