In Wendy's case, does she have the requisite intention for an intentional tort after hitting Andrew with a rock?

Wendy has the requisite intention for an intentional tort because her actions indicate that she intended to strike Andrew with the rock. In tort law, the element of intention is satisfied when a person acts with the purpose of accomplishing a specific result or knows that certain consequences are substantially certain to result from their actions. If Wendy aimed the rock at Andrew, even if her aim was not perfect, she still demonstrated an intention to cause a specific outcome—that is, to hit him.

The belief that she intended to strike him is crucial here; it shows that her actions were deliberate rather than accidental. This intention is a fundamental requirement in establishing liability for an intentional tort, such as battery.

Intention does not require that Wendy's aim was precise or that she had a malicious motive; it is enough that she had the physical act combined with the intention to bring about the contact. Therefore, Wendy's act of hitting Andrew with the rock fulfills the criteria needed for her to be considered to have acted with intention in the context of an intentional tort.