What does "indirect contact" mean in the context of battery?

In the context of battery, "indirect contact" refers specifically to contact that occurs through a third party. This means that an individual can still be held liable for battery even if they did not make physical contact with the plaintiff directly. For instance, if person A throws a rock intending to hit person B, but instead, the rock strikes person C, a battery claim can still be made against person A for the indirect contact with person C. This highlights the principle that the intent to harm or offend, along with the resulting contact, is what constitutes battery, regardless of the directness of that contact.

The other options do not describe indirect contact accurately. Direct contact with the plaintiff's person would be considered a straightforward case of battery rather than indirect. Conversely, solely verbal contact does not constitute battery because battery requires an actual physical or tangible contact, and intentional avoidance does not align with the concept of contact in a battery claim. Thus, indirectly causing harm or offense through another person is a significant aspect of understanding how battery laws apply.