Confidentiality Principle Invoked for Plaintiff Information Accessed by Engineer A
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#Confidentiality_Principle_Invoked_for_Plaintiff_Information_Accessed_by_Engineer_A
Properties
Instance of
Applied to
Plaintiff's confidential case documents and information shared with Engineer A during initial retention
Balancing with
Engineer Professional Autonomy and Independence Preservation Principle
Objectivity
Concrete expression
The confidential information, documents, and cooperative access provided by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney to Engineer A during his initial retention created a confidentiality obligation that persisted after the formal engagement ended and barred Engineer A from using that information in service of the opposing party
Confidence
0.95
Importance
high
Interpretation
The Board treated the plaintiff's voluntary transmission of confidential information to Engineer A as fully engaging his confidentiality obligation under Section III.4, consistent with the Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Stronger Obligation Principle
Invoked by
Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides
Plaintiff Former Client Adverse Party
Tension resolution
Confidentiality obligation prevailed; Engineer A could not credibly provide independent analysis for the defense because doing so would necessarily implicate his prior confidential access to the plaintiff's information
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A throughout his first analysis had access to information, documents, etc., that were made available to him by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney in a cooperative and mutually beneficial manner.
Text references
Engineer A throughout his first analysis had access to information, documents, etc., that were made available to him by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney in a cooperative and mutually beneficial manner.
we must recognize that while Engineer A may not currently have a professional relationship with a former client, he still has an ethical obligation to that client to protect certain confidential information and facts
TTL
@prefix case172: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#> .
@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#> .
case172:Confidentiality_Principle_Invoked_for_Plaintiff_Information_Accessed_by_Engineer_A a proeth:ConfidentialityPrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Confidentiality Principle Invoked for Plaintiff Information Accessed by Engineer A" ;
proeth:appliedto "Plaintiff's confidential case documents and information shared with Engineer A during initial retention" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Engineer Professional Autonomy and Independence Preservation Principle",
"Objectivity" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The confidential information, documents, and cooperative access provided by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney to Engineer A during his initial retention created a confidentiality obligation that persisted after the formal engagement ended and barred Engineer A from using that information in service of the opposing party" ;
proeth:confidence "0.95" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The Board treated the plaintiff's voluntary transmission of confidential information to Engineer A as fully engaging his confidentiality obligation under Section III.4, consistent with the Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Stronger Obligation Principle" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides",
"Plaintiff Former Client Adverse Party" ;
proeth:principleclass "Confidentiality Principle" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A throughout his first analysis had access to information, documents, etc., that were made available to him by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney in a cooperative and mutually beneficial manner." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Confidentiality obligation prevailed; Engineer A could not credibly provide independent analysis for the defense because doing so would necessarily implicate his prior confidential access to the plaintiff's information" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A throughout his first analysis had access to information, documents, etc., that were made available to him by the plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney in a cooperative and mutually beneficial manner.",
"we must recognize that while Engineer A may not currently have a professional relationship with a former client, he still has an ethical obligation to that client to protect certain confidential information and facts" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 172 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:28:40.765669"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 172 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
172
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00
First case
172
Generated
2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00
Attributed to
Case 172 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:28:40.765669
Generated by
ProEthica Case 172 Extraction