Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides Prohibition

O · Obligation Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Engineer_A_Forensic_Expert_Switching_Sides_Prohibition
Properties
Instance of
SwitchingSidesForensicExpertProhibitionObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#SwitchingSidesForensicExpertProhibitionObligation
Case context
Engineer A was initially retained by plaintiff's attorney (Attorney Z) to provide forensic engineering and safety analysis; after determining findings would be unfavorable to plaintiff, Engineer A's services were terminated; defendant's attorney (Attorney X) then sought to retain Engineer A for a 'separate and independent' analysis in the same case.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.95
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to refrain from accepting retention by Attorney X (defendant's counsel) after having been retained by Attorney Z (plaintiff's counsel) in the same personal injury litigation, because Engineer A had accessed confidential information and documents belonging to the plaintiff during the first engagement that could not be erased from professional judgment.
Temporal scope
Upon being approached by Attorney X following termination by Attorney Z
Source Evidence
Source text
In deciding that Engineer A's actions were not ethical, the Board noted that the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand.

Text references
Engineer A agreed to provide the report.
In deciding that Engineer A's actions were not ethical, the Board noted that the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand.
Nor did the Board believe the latter point that Engineer A would be capable of providing a 'separate and independent' report for the defendant in this case.
TTL
@prefix case106: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#> . @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . @prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> . @prefix proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> . @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> . @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . case106:Engineer_A_Forensic_Expert_Switching_Sides_Prohibition a proeth:SwitchingSidesForensicExpertProhibitionObligation, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides Prohibition" ; proeth-core:competesWith case106:Engineer_A_Adversarial_Retention_Motivation_Awareness, case106:Engineer_A_Former_Client_Confidentiality_Perpetuation_Post-Termination ; proeth-core:defeasibleUnder <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Engineer_A_Conflict_of_Interest_—_Cross-Side_Adversarial_Retention_BER_85-4>, <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Engineer_A_Cross-Side_Retention_After_Plaintiff_Confidential_Access_—_BER_Case_85-4> ; proeth-core:prevailsOver case106:Engineer_A_Adversarial_Retention_Motivation_Awareness ; proeth:casecontext "Engineer A was initially retained by plaintiff's attorney (Attorney Z) to provide forensic engineering and safety analysis; after determining findings would be unfavorable to plaintiff, Engineer A's services were terminated; defendant's attorney (Attorney X) then sought to retain Engineer A for a 'separate and independent' analysis in the same case." ; proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ; proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ; proeth:confidence "0.95" ; proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case106:Switching_Sides_Prohibition_Applied_to_Engineer_A_Forensic_Expert_Role_in_BER_Case_85-4 ; proeth:discoveredincase "106" ; proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ; proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T00:48:58.362061+00:00" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "106" ; proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T00:48:58.362061+00:00" ; proeth:importance "high" ; proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ; proeth:obligationclass "Switching Sides Forensic Expert Prohibition Obligation" ; proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to refrain from accepting retention by Attorney X (defendant's counsel) after having been retained by Attorney Z (plaintiff's counsel) in the same personal injury litigation, because Engineer A had accessed confidential information and documents belonging to the plaintiff during the first engagement that could not be erased from professional judgment." ; proeth:sourcetext "In deciding that Engineer A's actions were not ethical, the Board noted that the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand." ; proeth:temporalscope "Upon being approached by Attorney X following termination by Attorney Z" ; proeth:textreferences "Engineer A agreed to provide the report.", "In deciding that Engineer A's actions were not ethical, the Board noted that the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand.", "Nor did the Board believe the latter point that Engineer A would be capable of providing a 'separate and independent' report for the defendant in this case." ; proeth:wasattributedto "Case 106 Extraction" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T00:58:47.918554"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 106 Extraction" .
Metadata
Type
Individual
Last Updated
2026-05-28 16:26
Discovered in case
106
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T00:48:58.362061+00:00
First case
106
Generated
2026-02-28T00:48:58.362061+00:00
Attributed to
Case 106 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T00:58:47.918554
Generated by
ProEthica Case 106 Extraction