A missionary was travelling door to door hoping to convert others to his church. At one house, a devout elderly woman answered the door and the two began discussing their religious differences. The conversation took a disagreeable turn, and the woman, greatly offended, slammed her door shut. The missionary had been leaning with his hand on the doorway during their conversation, and as a consequence, his fingers were pinched in the door, causing him injury. If the missionary asserts a claim based on battery against the woman and prevails, what is the most likely reason

The available options are:

A woman had not first asked the missionary to leave the property.

B The woman knew that the door was substantially certain to pinch the missionary's fingers.

C The woman acted in anger by slamming the door shut

D The missionary was not trespassing when he came to the woman's door.

B. The woman knew that the door was substantially certain to pinch the missionary's fingers.

Explanation:

If the missionary prevails, it will be because the woman knew that the door substantially certain to pinch the missionary's fingers.

This is because the action of the woman which is considered as the battery would be seen as an intentional tort or action from her if it can be proven that the woman is sure that the door would pinch the missionary's fingers.

Therefore, such an action would be considered as requisite intent for the battery committed.

c-flooding of the area and the development of wetlands.

tell me if im wrong.

1. senate

2.there is no diagram

3.education