Also known as:tortious intents · intentional tort · tort intent
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The mental state required for liability in intentional torts. It exists when the actor either desires to cause the harmful or offensive contact or knows with substantial certainty that the contact will result, even if the actor does not desire the resulting injury.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Third-Party Battery After Negligent Setup
Tristan Thompson left his unlocked warehouse accessible after ignoring repeated warnings about local theft risks. Tiffany Torres, spotting the open door, deliberately entered and struck a security guard with a crowbar. Tiffany's knowledge that the blow would cause harmful contact satisfies tortious intent for battery, so the guard's claim against her proceeds even though Tristan's negligence created the opportunity.
Targeted Defamatory Post in Forum
Tyler Taylor, based outside State R, published a false accusation that Tracy Torres had committed fraud during a State R film production. He then bought ads shown only to State R industry professionals. Tyler's deliberate publication of known falsehoods aimed at Tracy's State R reputation meets tortious intent for defamation and supports personal jurisdiction in State R.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Restatements
Study Supplements
School Paddle With Known Contact
A teacher at a public school swung a paddle at Theodore Tucker after the student disrupted class. The teacher knew the paddle would make contact with the student's body. That knowledge establishes tortious intent for battery regardless of whether the teacher intended lasting injury.
Ingraham v. Wright430 U. S. 651 (1977)
Chemical Drift With Substantial Certainty
Theresa Tucker sprayed herbicide on her field knowing the wind would carry it onto the neighboring organic farm owned by True North Logistics. The spray made contact with the crops. Theresa's awareness that the particles would reach the crops satisfies tortious intent for trespass to chattels.
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co.817 N.W.2d 693, 704 (Minn. 2012)
Cross-Border Abduction Plan
Torchlight Media executives directed agents to seize a journalist in Mexico and bring him to the United States for questioning. The executives knew the seizure would involve harmful contact. Their knowledge that the contact would occur establishes tortious intent for the underlying tort even though planning occurred domestically.
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain542 U.S. 692 (2004)
Concealment of Product Risks
Terra Financial marketed cigarettes while internal documents showed executives knew the product caused lung cancer. The company continued sales knowing users would suffer harmful contact with the carcinogens. That awareness constitutes tortious intent supporting the intentional-tort claims that survived preemption analysis.
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.893 F.2d 541 (3d Cir.1990), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 505 U.S. 504 (1992)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
Does tortious intent require proof that the defendant desired the resulting injury?+
No. Tortious intent exists when the actor either desires the contact or knows with substantial certainty that the contact will occur. The defendant need not desire the precise injury that follows.
Supporting sources
Can a very young child form tortious intent?+
Yes. A child possesses tortious intent for battery if the child knows with substantial certainty that harmful or offensive contact will result from the act.
Supporting sources
How does tortious intent differ from negligence in emotional-distress cases?+
Tortious intent requires desire for the contact or substantial certainty it will occur. Negligence claims for emotional distress leading to bodily harm rest on whether the defendant should have realized the conduct created an unreasonable risk of serious emotional disturbance likely to cause illness.
Supporting sources
893 F.2d 541 (3d Cir. 1990), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 505 U.S. 504 (1992)Torts
…of Limitations Defense? .......... 579 XII. Did the District Court Err in Holding That Federal Law Preempted Plaintiff's Intentional Tort Claims? ............................................... 581 XIII. Conclusion ........................................................................... 583 BECKER, Circuit Judge. I.…