Engineer A Route Selection Eminent Domain Availability Disclosure Present Case
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/123#Engineer_A_Route_Selection_Eminent_Domain_Availability_Disclosure_Present_Case
Properties
Instance of
EminentDomainAvailabilityDisclosureObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#EminentDomainAvailabilityDisclosureObligation
Case context
Engineer A retained by the state to specify a road route; the shortest route requires acquisition of a historic family farmhouse; the Board notes that condemnation proceedings are a potential outcome under the greatest-good standard.
Compliance status
unclear
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A (Route Selection Design Engineer, present case)
Obligation statement
Engineer A must inform the state that eminent domain is legally available as a mechanism to acquire the historic farmhouse property for the shortest route, while also presenting the full consequences — including the owner's unwillingness to sell, the historic significance of the property, and the availability of alternative routes — so that the state can make a fully informed decision about whether to exercise that legal authority.
Temporal scope
During route specification and advisory process
Relationships
derivedFromPrinciple
Eminent Doma in Advisory Obligation Invoked by Engineer A Route Selection
Source Evidence
Source text
While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue.
Text references
While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue.
TTL
@prefix case123: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/123#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@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#> .
case123:Engineer_A_Route_Selection_Eminent_Domain_Availability_Disclosure_Present_Case a proeth:EminentDomainAvailabilityDisclosureObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Route Selection Eminent Domain Availability Disclosure Present Case" ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A retained by the state to specify a road route; the shortest route requires acquisition of a historic family farmhouse; the Board notes that condemnation proceedings are a potential outcome under the greatest-good standard." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unclear" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case123:Eminent_Domain_Advisory_Obligation_Invoked_by_Engineer_A_Route_Selection ;
proeth:discoveredincase "123" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T00:05:45.073046+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "123" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T00:05:45.073046+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A (Route Selection Design Engineer, present case)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Eminent Domain Availability Disclosure Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A must inform the state that eminent domain is legally available as a mechanism to acquire the historic farmhouse property for the shortest route, while also presenting the full consequences — including the owner's unwillingness to sell, the historic significance of the property, and the availability of alternative routes — so that the state can make a fully informed decision about whether to exercise that legal authority." ;
proeth:sourcetext "While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue." ;
proeth:temporalscope "During route specification and advisory process" ;
proeth:textreferences "While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 123 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T00:14:43.766375"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 123 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
123
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T00:05:45.073046+00:00
First case
123
Generated
2026-02-28T00:05:45.073046+00:00
Attributed to
Case 123 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T00:14:43.766375
Generated by
ProEthica Case 123 Extraction