Engineer B Discharged Engineer Review Without Notification Permissibility Case 82-5

@prefix case173: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#> . @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#> . case173:Engineer_B_Discharged_Engineer_Review_Without_Notification_Permissibility_Case_82-5 a proeth:DischargedEngineerReviewWithoutNotificationPermissibilityRecognitionObligation, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "Engineer B Discharged Engineer Review Without Notification Permissibility Case 82-5" ; proeth-core:competesWith case173:Engineer_B_Post-Discharge_Collegial_Consultation_Prudential_Obligation_Case_82-5, case173:Engineer_B_Successor_Engineer_Prior-Engineer_Communication_Before_Redesign ; proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case173:Engineer_A_Seal_Retained_on_Engineer_B_Altered_Grading_Plans, case173:Engineer_A_Seal_Retained_on_Engineer_B_Altered_Public_Improvement_Plans, case173:Engineer_B_Undocumented_Redesign_on_Engineer_A_Plans ; proeth:casecontext "Engineer B was retained by the subdivision client to review and redesign a project after the client discharged Engineer A following full fee payment. The client passed Engineer A's sealed plans to Engineer B to use as a guide." ; proeth:compliancestatus "met" ; proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ; proeth:confidence "0.9" ; proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case173:Peer_Review_Purpose_Articulated_in_Case_79-7_Precedent ; proeth:discoveredincase "173" ; proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ; proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T14:31:07.586453+00:00" ; proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "173" ; proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T14:31:07.586453+00:00" ; proeth:importance "medium" ; proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer B (Successor Design Engineer)" ; proeth:obligationclass "Discharged Engineer Review Without Notification Permissibility Recognition Obligation" ; proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer B was not ethically required to notify Engineer A before reviewing Engineer A's work, because Engineer A had been formally discharged by the client, terminating the professional relationship that triggers the NSPE III.8.a. notification requirement." ; proeth:sourcetext "this Board concedes that Engineer B did not act unethically in agreeing to review the work of Engineer A without notifying Engineer A" ; proeth:temporalscope "At the time Engineer B was retained and commenced review of Engineer A's sealed plans" ; proeth:textreferences "the client clearly discharged Engineer A from his services", "this Board concedes that Engineer B did not act unethically in agreeing to review the work of Engineer A without notifying Engineer A" ; proeth:wasattributedto "Case 173 Extraction" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T14:41:54.509105"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 173 Extraction" .