What can make a defendant liable for an intentional tort executed by another person?

The correct answer is rooted in the principles of vicarious liability and the doctrines that address the liability of one party for the intentional torts committed by another. When a defendant has substantially instigated or assisted in the commission of a tortious act, they can be held liable even if they did not directly commit the tort themselves. This is particularly relevant in cases where one person encourages or facilitates another person’s unlawful conduct.

For example, if someone actively encourages a friend to harm another person or provides the means to commit that harm, their involvement can transform them into a co-perpetrator of the intentional tort. The law aims to hold accountable those who play a significant role in the wrongful action, thereby promoting responsibility among individuals about their influence and actions concerning others.

The other options do not establish liability under intentional tort principles in the same way. While a defendant’s intent to cause harm (the first option) might refer to their personal conduct, it does not encompass the scenario of one person being liable for someone else's tortious activity without direct involvement. Similarly, a direct relationship with the plaintiff (the third option) does not by itself create liability; rather, the nature of the defendant's involvement in the tort matters. Lastly, financial benefit from