Inter-Engineer Communication Obligation Violated by Engineer B
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#Inter-Engineer_Communication_Obligation_Violated_by_Engineer_B
Properties
Instance of
Inter-EngineerCommunicationObligationinSequentialDesignEngagement
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Inter-EngineerCommunicationObligationinSequentialDesignEngagement
Applied to
Engineer A's sealed plan sets
Subdivision redesign engagement
Balancing with
Client confidentiality
Client interest in avoiding contact with discharged Engineer A
Concrete expression
Engineer B was retained to review and redesign a subdivision project using Engineer A's sealed plans as a guide, but made major changes across both plan sets without initiating any communication with Engineer A — foregoing the opportunity to understand Engineer A's design intent, identify known project constraints, and ensure Engineer A was aware that their sealed work was being materially modified.
Confidence
0.87
Importance
high
Interpretation
The communication obligation was triggered by the magnitude of the redesign — major changes to grading, elevations, street routing, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities — which made Engineer A's design intent knowledge directly relevant to the quality and safety of Engineer B's redesign decisions.
Invoked by
Engineer B Undocumented Alteration Successor Design Engineer
Tension resolution
The client's interest in avoiding contact with the discharged engineer does not override Engineer B's independent professional obligation to communicate with the original engineer when making material changes to their sealed work.
Source Evidence
Source text
At no time after Engineer B was retained were there any communications between the two engineers.
Text references
At no time after Engineer B was retained were there any communications between the two engineers.
Engineer B was later retained by the client to review and redesign the project.
The client gave Engineer B the set of plans produced by Engineer A to use as a guide in the redesign.
TTL
@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 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:Inter-Engineer_Communication_Obligation_Violated_by_Engineer_B a proeth:Inter-EngineerCommunicationObligationinSequentialDesignEngagement,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Inter-Engineer Communication Obligation Violated by Engineer B" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's sealed plan sets",
"Subdivision redesign engagement" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Client confidentiality",
"Client interest in avoiding contact with discharged Engineer A" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer B was retained to review and redesign a subdivision project using Engineer A's sealed plans as a guide, but made major changes across both plan sets without initiating any communication with Engineer A — foregoing the opportunity to understand Engineer A's design intent, identify known project constraints, and ensure Engineer A was aware that their sealed work was being materially modified." ;
proeth:confidence "0.87" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T14:20:21.416449+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T14:20:21.416449+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The communication obligation was triggered by the magnitude of the redesign — major changes to grading, elevations, street routing, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities — which made Engineer A's design intent knowledge directly relevant to the quality and safety of Engineer B's redesign decisions." ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer B Undocumented Alteration Successor Design Engineer" ;
proeth:principleclass "Inter-Engineer Communication Obligation in Sequential Design Engagement" ;
proeth:sourcetext "At no time after Engineer B was retained were there any communications between the two engineers." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The client's interest in avoiding contact with the discharged engineer does not override Engineer B's independent professional obligation to communicate with the original engineer when making material changes to their sealed work." ;
proeth:textreferences "At no time after Engineer B was retained were there any communications between the two engineers.",
"Engineer B was later retained by the client to review and redesign the project.",
"The client gave Engineer B the set of plans produced by Engineer A to use as a guide in the redesign." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 173 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T14:41:54.500113"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 173 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
173
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T14:20:21.416449+00:00
First case
173
Generated
2026-03-01T14:20:21.416449+00:00
Attributed to
Case 173 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T14:41:54.500113
Generated by
ProEthica Case 173 Extraction