DP1
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/60#DP1
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP1
Decision question
Should Engineer A verify State M licensure requirements and assess whether the engagement is substantively engineering work before accepting the retainer from Attorney X?
Focus
Engineer A is approached by Attorney X to serve as a non-engineering expert witness in a State M proceeding. Engineer A holds a valid PE license in another jurisdiction but not in State M. Before accepting, Engineer A must determine whether State M requires a PE license for the type of expert testimony contemplated, and whether the engagement as framed by Attorney X is genuinely non-engineering or is substantively engineering expert testimony recharacterized to avoid licensure requirements.
Option1
Before accepting, Engineer A independently researches State M's licensure statute, determines whether the contemplated testimony constitutes engineering practice under State M law, and declines or obtains licensure if required.
Option2
Engineer A relies on Attorney X's characterization that the engagement is non-engineering consulting and accepts without independently verifying State M licensure requirements.
Option3
Engineer A declines the engagement on the grounds that the jurisdictional licensure status is uncertain and the risk of unlicensed practice cannot be resolved without significant delay.
Role
Engineer A
TTL
@prefix case60: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/60#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@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#> .
case60:DP1 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer A verify State M licensure requirements and assess whether the engagement is substantively engineering work before accepting the retainer from Attorney X?" ;
proeth:focus "Engineer A is approached by Attorney X to serve as a non-engineering expert witness in a State M proceeding. Engineer A holds a valid PE license in another jurisdiction but not in State M. Before accepting, Engineer A must determine whether State M requires a PE license for the type of expert testimony contemplated, and whether the engagement as framed by Attorney X is genuinely non-engineering or is substantively engineering expert testimony recharacterized to avoid licensure requirements." ;
proeth:option1 "Before accepting, Engineer A independently researches State M's licensure statute, determines whether the contemplated testimony constitutes engineering practice under State M law, and declines or obtains licensure if required." ;
proeth:option2 "Engineer A relies on Attorney X's characterization that the engagement is non-engineering consulting and accepts without independently verifying State M licensure requirements." ;
proeth:option3 "Engineer A declines the engagement on the grounds that the jurisdictional licensure status is uncertain and the risk of unlicensed practice cannot be resolved without significant delay." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-05-27T20:10:55.077666"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 60 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-05-27T20:10:55.077666
Attributed to
claude-sonnet-4-6
Generated by
ProEthica Case 60 Extraction