Which statement is true regarding the 'intent' element for intentional torts?

The statement regarding intent for intentional torts highlights a crucial aspect of tort law. In the context of intentional torts, intent is defined not merely as a desire to bring about a specific result but also encompasses the understanding that certain consequences are substantially certain to occur as a result of one's actions. This means that a defendant can be found liable for an intentional tort if they acted with a conscious objective to bring about a certain result or if they had knowledge that their actions would almost certainly result in that outcome.

This understanding aligns with the foundational principles of intentional torts, which include acts such as battery, assault, false imprisonment, and others, where the focus is on the actor's state of mind and their purposeful or knowledgeable engagement in conduct that leads to harm.

The other statements do not accurately capture the legal definition of intent in the context of torts. For instance, while it is true that an unintended action does not show intent, that alone does not establish the broader definitions available under tort law. Similarly, intent applies to various types of intentional torts beyond just battery, and in strict liability cases, intent is not relevant to liability under those specific circumstances. Thus, the correct statement reflects a comprehensive understanding of how intent is assessed in the realm of