Opposing Party Retention Motivated by Prior Access State
Class
1d765589
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#OpposingPartyRetentionMotivatedbyPriorAccessState
Definition
State in which a new client's motivation for retaining an engineer is transparently linked to that engineer's prior access to the opposing party's confidential information and documents — rather than independent professional merit — such that the engineer knew or should have known the retention was sought to exploit prior privileged knowledge, making acceptance of the engagement ethically impermissible regardless of the engineer's subjective belief in their own impartiality.
Properties
Subclass of
Definition
State in which a new client's motivation for retaining an engineer is transparently linked to that engineer's prior access to the opposing party's confidential information and documents — rather than independent professional merit — such that the engineer knew or should have known the retention was sought to exploit prior privileged knowledge, making acceptance of the engagement ethically impermissible regardless of the engineer's subjective belief in their own impartiality.
Scope Note
[proethica-intermediate-extended] State in which a professional engineer, having been retained by one party in an adversarial proceeding and having gained access to that party's confidential documents, communications, and strategic information in a cooperative and mutually beneficial manner, is subsequently approached by the opposing party to provide services in the same proceeding — creating a structural prohibition on accepting the cross-side retention because the engineer cannot credibly partition the confidential knowledge gained from the first party, and because the opposing party's motivation for retention is transparently linked to the engineer's prior access rather than independent professional merit.
Source Evidence
Source Text
It is clear from the facts that the real reason for the defendant's attorney's hiring Engineering A was that he believed Engineer A would provide a report that would be favorable.
TTL
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proethica_intermediate_extended: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate-extended> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#OpposingPartyRetentionMotivatedbyPriorAccessState> a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Opposing Party Retention Motivated by Prior Access State" ;
rdfs:comment "State in which a new client's motivation for retaining an engineer is transparently linked to that engineer's prior access to the opposing party's confidential information and documents — rather than independent professional merit — such that the engineer knew or should have known the retention was sought to exploit prior privileged knowledge, making acceptance of the engagement ethically impermissible regardless of the engineer's subjective belief in their own impartiality." ;
rdfs:subClassOf <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#State> .
Metadata
Ontology
Type
Class
Content Hash
1d765589b2876932...Last Updated
2026-03-12 16:49
Extraction Provenance
Discovered in Case
172
Discovered In Pass
1
Discovered In Section
discussion
First Discovered At
2026-03-01T18:09:00.386512+00:00
First Discovered In Case
172
Generated
2026-03-01T18:09:00.386512+00:00
Was Attributed To
Case 172 Extraction