Engineer A Independent Report Pledge Non-Cure Violation
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#Engineer_A_Independent_Report_Pledge_Non-Cure_Violation
Properties
Instance of
IndependentReportPledgeNon-CureofSame-MatterSwitchingSidesObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#IndependentReportPledgeNon-CureofSame-MatterSwitchingSidesObligation
Case context
Engineer A attempted to justify his defense-side engagement by agreeing to provide a separate and independent report. The Board rejected this as an adequate cure, finding that Engineer A could not credibly segregate his prior knowledge from his current analysis.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to recognize that his agreement to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report' for the defense did not cure the ethical conflict created by his prior access to the plaintiff's confidential information in the same matter, and to decline the engagement on that basis.
Temporal scope
At the time of accepting defense retention and agreeing to provide an independent report
Relationships
competesWith
Engineer A Former Client Adversarial Proceeding Consent Prerequisite Violation, Engineer A Switching Sides Prohibition Violation Same Personal Injury Matter
Source Evidence
Source text
Nor is the fact that Engineer A has agreed to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report.'
Text references
Nor do we believe that latter point that Engineer A would be capable of providing a 'separate and independent' report for the defendant in this case. (See also Section II.4.b.)
Nor is the fact that Engineer A has agreed to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report.'
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 proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@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:Engineer_A_Independent_Report_Pledge_Non-Cure_Violation a proeth:IndependentReportPledgeNon-CureofSame-MatterSwitchingSidesObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Independent Report Pledge Non-Cure Violation" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case172:Engineer_A_Former_Client_Adversarial_Proceeding_Consent_Prerequisite_Violation,
case172:Engineer_A_Switching_Sides_Prohibition_Violation_Same_Personal_Injury_Matter ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case172:Engineer_A_Confidential_Information_Access_from_Plaintiff,
case172:Engineer_A_Cross-Side_Retention_by_Defendant_Attorney,
case172:Same-Proceeding_Cross-Side_Engagement_Absolute_Prohibition ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A attempted to justify his defense-side engagement by agreeing to provide a separate and independent report. The Board rejected this as an adequate cure, finding that Engineer A could not credibly segregate his prior knowledge from his current analysis." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case172:Disclosure_Insufficiency_for_Structural_Conflict_Invoked_Against_Independent_Report_Claim ;
proeth:discoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:19:02.353557+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:19:02.353557+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Independent Report Pledge Non-Cure of Same-Matter Switching Sides Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to recognize that his agreement to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report' for the defense did not cure the ethical conflict created by his prior access to the plaintiff's confidential information in the same matter, and to decline the engagement on that basis." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Nor is the fact that Engineer A has agreed to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report.'" ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time of accepting defense retention and agreeing to provide an independent report" ;
proeth:textreferences "Nor do we believe that latter point that Engineer A would be capable of providing a 'separate and independent' report for the defendant in this case. (See also Section II.4.b.)",
"Nor is the fact that Engineer A has agreed to provide a 'separate and independent engineering and safety analysis report.'" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 172 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:28:40.775286"^^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
2026-03-01T18:19:02.353557+00:00
First case
172
Generated
2026-03-01T18:19:02.353557+00:00
Attributed to
Case 172 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:28:40.775286
Generated by
ProEthica Case 172 Extraction