{"id":11509,"date":"2017-11-18T20:57:27","date_gmt":"2017-11-19T01:57:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/?p=11509"},"modified":"2017-11-20T20:12:19","modified_gmt":"2017-11-21T01:12:19","slug":"the-element-of-intent-how-the-court-determines-your-thoughts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/2017\/11\/18\/the-element-of-intent-how-the-court-determines-your-thoughts\/","title":{"rendered":"The Element of Intent: How the Court Determines Your Thoughts"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
Photo Credit: Creative Commons<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

By Mariah Mandy, Staff Writer<\/strong><\/p>\n

An Age Old Excuse<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

When we were young, the most common response to getting in trouble was \u201cI didn\u2019t mean to.\u201d We used that phrase for all types of circumstances\u2014spilling drinks, making messes, or even hitting our siblings. Sometimes, that excuse would get us out of trouble, because accidents really do happen. However, these accidents are minor, and the consequences are small.<\/p>\n

Amazingly, even when serious accidents occur, the defendant may still be able to resort to the same excuse he gave as a child. \u201cI didn\u2019t mean to\u201d may still be the phrase that gets you out of situations with more injurious consequences.<\/p>\n

The Role of Intent in Torts<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

There are seven torts in law that require the common element of intent: assault, battery, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, conversion, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.[1]<\/sup><\/a> With each of these torts, the defendant must have shown intent in order for the plaintiff to recover.[2]<\/sup><\/a> Because determining liability is contingent on the element of intent, defendants can deny their intent, similar to the way they denied fault in causing accidents when they were young.<\/p>\n

Though a defendant may repeatedly state that it was not his intention to assault a plaintiff, the courts have a two-part test for determining the actual intent of the actor. First, did the actor have the purpose or desire? Additionally, did the actor have knowledge of substantial certainty that a contact will occur?[3]<\/sup><\/a> Note that the second prong does not require knowledge of substantial certainty that harmful <\/em>contact would occur, only that some form of contact with the plaintiff would result.[4]<\/sup><\/a> When analyzing this two-pronged definition, the court considers whether the individual\u2019s outward expressions manifested an intent.[5]<\/sup><\/a> In other words, the court looks at the individual\u2019s actions.<\/p>\n

When \u201cI Didn\u2019t Mean To\u201d Contradicts Your Actions<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

In the case of Garratt v. Dailey<\/em>, a five-year-old boy was charged with battery when he moved the chair where his aunt had been sitting. When his aunt went to sit back down, she fell and suffered injuries. Despite that the boy did not want his aunt to be hurt, the court held that he may have satisfied the element of intent. The boy did not possess the purpose or desire. However, he may have known with knowledge of substantial certainty that contact would occur, because he attempted to move the chair back when he saw his aunt about to sit down. The court ultimately remanded the case for clarification.[6]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

While the court was not capable of looking into the boy\u2019s mind for intent, it could look to his actions to determine whether he satisfied the element. Similar to other accidents a five-year-old boy may cause, such a boy could easily look to the judge and say, \u201cI didn\u2019t mean to.\u201d But, if the court determines his actions manifested an intent, he nevertheless satisfies one of the elements of battery. On the other hand, if the court is unable to find intent, then \u201cI didn\u2019t mean to\u201d may very well be the language that deflects liability.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

[1]<\/a> Weaver, Bauman, Cross, Klien, Martin, Zwier \u201cTorts Cases, Problems, and Exercises”<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Id<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Id<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Id<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Id<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Id<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Mariah Mandy, Staff Writer An Age Old Excuse When we were young, the most common response to getting in trouble was \u201cI didn\u2019t mean to.\u201d We used that phrase for all types of circumstances\u2014spilling drinks, making messes, or even hitting our siblings. Sometimes, that excuse would get us out [\u2026] <\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,4],"tags":[2022,2023,2019,2021,630,1975,2020,1633],"class_list":["post-11509","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-juris-blog","category-posts","tag-contact","tag-garratt-v-dailey","tag-intent","tag-knowledge","tag-liability","tag-mariah-mandy","tag-substantial-certainty","tag-torts"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11509","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11509"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11509\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11512,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11509\/revisions\/11512"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}