Switching Sides Prohibition Invoked Against Engineer A
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#Switching_Sides_Prohibition_Invoked_Against_Engineer_A
Properties
Instance of
SwitchingSidesProhibitioninAdversarialProceedings
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#SwitchingSidesProhibitioninAdversarialProceedings
Applied to
Engineer A's acceptance of retention by Attorney X after termination by Attorney Z in the same personal injury proceeding
Balancing with
Absolute Loyalty Prohibition to Former Clients
Engineer Professional Autonomy and Independence Preservation Principle
Concrete expression
Engineer A, having been retained by plaintiff's attorney and gained access to plaintiff's confidential documents and information, accepted retention by the defense attorney in the same personal injury litigation after termination of the plaintiff-side engagement — a paradigmatic switching-sides violation
Confidence
0.97
Importance
high
Interpretation
The Board held that Engineer A's prior access to plaintiff's confidential information, documents, and cooperative engagement created an indelible informational relationship that barred him from accepting the opposing party's retention in the same proceeding, regardless of formal termination of the first engagement
Invoked by
Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides
Tension resolution
The switching-sides prohibition prevailed over Engineer A's autonomy to accept new engagements because the prior confidential access created an irreconcilable structural conflict that termination of the formal relationship could not cure
Source Evidence
Source text
the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand
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.
In the present case, the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand.
This Board cannot accept the proposition that following the termination of his relationship with attorney for the plaintiff he would 'blot all' of that information from his mind and start from 'square one'
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:Switching_Sides_Prohibition_Invoked_Against_Engineer_A a proeth:SwitchingSidesProhibitioninAdversarialProceedings,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Switching Sides Prohibition Invoked Against Engineer A" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's acceptance of retention by Attorney X after termination by Attorney Z in the same personal injury proceeding" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Absolute Loyalty Prohibition to Former Clients",
"Engineer Professional Autonomy and Independence Preservation Principle" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A, having been retained by plaintiff's attorney and gained access to plaintiff's confidential documents and information, accepted retention by the defense attorney in the same personal injury litigation after termination of the plaintiff-side engagement — a paradigmatic switching-sides violation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.97" ;
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 held that Engineer A's prior access to plaintiff's confidential information, documents, and cooperative engagement created an indelible informational relationship that barred him from accepting the opposing party's retention in the same proceeding, regardless of formal termination of the first engagement" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides" ;
proeth:principleclass "Switching Sides Prohibition in Adversarial Proceedings" ;
proeth:sourcetext "the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand" ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The switching-sides prohibition prevailed over Engineer A's autonomy to accept new engagements because the prior confidential access created an irreconcilable structural conflict that termination of the formal relationship could not cure" ;
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.",
"In the present case, the mere fact that Engineer A ceased performing services for Attorney Z would not be an adequate solution to the ethical dilemma at hand.",
"This Board cannot accept the proposition that following the termination of his relationship with attorney for the plaintiff he would 'blot all' of that information from his mind and start from 'square one'" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 172 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:28:40.765308"^^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
2026-03-01T18:28:40.765308
Generated by
ProEthica Case 172 Extraction