Engineer Non-Advocate Status — Forensic Expert Objectivity in Litigation Context
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/136#Engineer_Non-Advocate_Status_—_Forensic_Expert_Objectivity_in_Litigation_Context
Properties
Instance of
ForensicExpertNon-AdvocateStatusinCivilLitigation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ForensicExpertNon-AdvocateStatusinCivilLitigation
Applied to
Engineer A's role as forensic expert witness retained by attorney in tenant litigation
Balancing with
Attorney-Directed Confidentiality Non-Override of Imminent Structural Safety Disclosure
Confidentiality Principle
Concrete expression
Engineer A, retained as a forensic expert witness by the building owner's attorney in tenant litigation, is not an advocate for the building owner's litigation position — Engineer A's role is to provide objective technical analysis, and this non-advocate status means Engineer A cannot be bound by the attorney's confidentiality instruction when that instruction would suppress life-safety information from those at risk.
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Interpretation
The forensic expert's non-advocate status means that the attorney's authority to direct the expert's conduct is limited by the expert's independent professional obligations; the attorney cannot use the retention relationship to transform the engineer into a partisan advocate who suppresses safety-critical findings.
Invoked by
Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
Engineer A's non-advocate status as a forensic expert means the attorney's confidentiality instruction cannot override Engineer A's independent professional obligation to disclose imminent structural danger; the engineer's objectivity and independence are not subordinated to the litigation strategy.
Source Evidence
Source text
However, there were valid reasons why Engineer A should have revealed the information directly to the tenants and public authorities.
Text references
Engineer A's client was the attorney and technically Engineer A had an obligation not to reveal facts, data or other information in a professional capacity without the prior consent of attorney.
However, there were valid reasons why Engineer A should have revealed the information directly to the tenants and public authorities.
TTL
@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#> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/136#Engineer_Non-Advocate_Status_—_Forensic_Expert_Objectivity_in_Litigation_Context> a proeth:ForensicExpertNon-AdvocateStatusinCivilLitigation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer Non-Advocate Status — Forensic Expert Objectivity in Litigation Context" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's role as forensic expert witness retained by attorney in tenant litigation" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Attorney-Directed Confidentiality Non-Override of Imminent Structural Safety Disclosure",
"Confidentiality Principle" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A, retained as a forensic expert witness by the building owner's attorney in tenant litigation, is not an advocate for the building owner's litigation position — Engineer A's role is to provide objective technical analysis, and this non-advocate status means Engineer A cannot be bound by the attorney's confidentiality instruction when that instruction would suppress life-safety information from those at risk." ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "136" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T13:03:31.215609+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "136" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T13:03:31.215609+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The forensic expert's non-advocate status means that the attorney's authority to direct the expert's conduct is limited by the expert's independent professional obligations; the attorney cannot use the retention relationship to transform the engineer into a partisan advocate who suppresses safety-critical findings." ;
proeth:invokedby "Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Forensic Expert Non-Advocate Status in Civil Litigation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "However, there were valid reasons why Engineer A should have revealed the information directly to the tenants and public authorities." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Engineer A's non-advocate status as a forensic expert means the attorney's confidentiality instruction cannot override Engineer A's independent professional obligation to disclose imminent structural danger; the engineer's objectivity and independence are not subordinated to the litigation strategy." ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A's client was the attorney and technically Engineer A had an obligation not to reveal facts, data or other information in a professional capacity without the prior consent of attorney.",
"However, there were valid reasons why Engineer A should have revealed the information directly to the tenants and public authorities." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 136 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T13:14:37.527352"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 136 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
136
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T13:03:31.215609+00:00
First case
136
Generated
2026-03-01T13:03:31.215609+00:00
Attributed to
Case 136 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T13:14:37.527352
Generated by
ProEthica Case 136 Extraction