BER Case No. 97-2
Rs · Resource
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/127#BER_Case_No._97-2
Properties
Instance of
Confidence
0.97
Created by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Document title
NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case No. 97-2
Importance
high
Used by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review to distinguish Engineer A's conduct from a more ethically defensible scenario
Used in context
Cited as a distinguishing precedent where client impetus (the client approaching the engineer and encouraging independent practice) mitigated the ethical concerns about an engineer departing to compete — contrasted with the present case where no such client impetus existed
Source Evidence
Source text
unlike the facts in BER Case No. 97-2, in which the client actually approached the engineer and encouraged the engineer to open his own company and suggested that the engineer could expect a retainer with the client, there does not appear to be any client impetus that would mitigate the actions taken by Engineer A under the facts.
Text references
unlike the facts in BER Case No. 97-2, in which the client actually approached the engineer and encouraged the engineer to open his own company and suggested that the engineer could expect a retainer with the client, there does not appear to be any client impetus that would mitigate the actions taken by Engineer A under the facts.
TTL
@prefix case127: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/127#> .
@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#> .
case127:BER_Case_No._97-2 a proeth:BERCasePrecedent,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "BER Case No. 97-2" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Resource" ;
proeth:confidence "0.97" ;
proeth:createdby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "127" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:documenttitle "NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case No. 97-2" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T03:11:47.259654+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "127" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T03:11:47.259654+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:resourceclass "BER Case Precedent" ;
proeth:sourcetext "unlike the facts in BER Case No. 97-2, in which the client actually approached the engineer and encouraged the engineer to open his own company and suggested that the engineer could expect a retainer with the client, there does not appear to be any client impetus that would mitigate the actions taken by Engineer A under the facts." ;
proeth:textreferences "unlike the facts in BER Case No. 97-2, in which the client actually approached the engineer and encouraged the engineer to open his own company and suggested that the engineer could expect a retainer with the client, there does not appear to be any client impetus that would mitigate the actions taken by Engineer A under the facts." ;
proeth:usedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review to distinguish Engineer A's conduct from a more ethically defensible scenario" ;
proeth:usedincontext "Cited as a distinguishing precedent where client impetus (the client approaching the engineer and encouraging independent practice) mitigated the ethical concerns about an engineer departing to compete — contrasted with the present case where no such client impetus existed" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 127 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T03:44:36.617278"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 127 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
127
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T03:11:47.259654+00:00
First case
127
Generated
2026-03-01T03:11:47.259654+00:00
Attributed to
Case 127 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T03:44:36.617278
Generated by
ProEthica Case 127 Extraction