Engineer B Litigation Neutrality Violation
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/71#Engineer_B_Litigation_Neutrality_Violation
Definition
Engineer B, retained by the municipality in litigation against Engineer A, produced a report that relied exclusively on depth-of-penetration analysis to conclude 19 piles were deficient while omitting wave equation analysis of driving records that would have supported Engineer A's position, and without consulting Engineer A's available representatives.
Properties
Instance of
LitigationNeutralityPrinciple
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#LitigationNeutralityPrinciple
Applied to
Expert investigation and report in contractor and municipality litigation
Balancing with
Faithful Agent Duty Principle
Loyalty
Concrete expression
Engineer B, retained by the municipality in litigation against Engineer A, produced a report that relied exclusively on depth-of-penetration analysis to conclude 19 piles were deficient while omitting wave equation analysis of driving records that would have supported Engineer A's position, and without consulting Engineer A's available representatives.
Confidence
0.9
Interpretation
Engineer B's selective use of analytical methods and omission of contradictory evidence indicate that the report was shaped to support the retaining party's litigation position rather than to render an objective technical opinion.
Tension resolution
An engineer's duty to provide technically honest expert analysis in litigation overrides the duty of loyalty to the retaining party when those duties conflict.
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Synthesis Literal
appliedTo
balancingWith
concreteExpression
confidence
interpretation
principleClass
tensionResolution
textReferences
Relationships
invokedBy
Agent Engineer B
Source Evidence
Text references
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations. This opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction resistance value to the square footage of pile penetration.
Source text
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
TTL
@prefix case71: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/71#> .
@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 proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case71:Engineer_B_Litigation_Neutrality_Violation a proeth:LitigationNeutralityPrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer B Litigation Neutrality Violation" ;
proeth-core:invokedBy case71:Agent_Engineer_B ;
proeth:appliedTo "Expert investigation and report in contractor and municipality litigation" ;
proeth:balancingWith "Faithful Agent Duty Principle",
"Loyalty" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteExpression "Engineer B, retained by the municipality in litigation against Engineer A, produced a report that relied exclusively on depth-of-penetration analysis to conclude 19 piles were deficient while omitting wave equation analysis of driving records that would have supported Engineer A's position, and without consulting Engineer A's available representatives." ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:interpretation "Engineer B's selective use of analytical methods and omission of contradictory evidence indicate that the report was shaped to support the retaining party's litigation position rather than to render an objective technical opinion." ;
proeth:invokedBy "Engineer B Litigation Expert" ;
proeth:principleClass "Litigation Neutrality Principle" ;
proeth:tensionResolution "An engineer's duty to provide technically honest expert analysis in litigation overrides the duty of loyalty to the retaining party when those duties conflict." ;
proeth:textReferences "Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.",
"Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations. This opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction resistance value to the square footage of pile penetration." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 71 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "facts" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 71 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.0 ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting false ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements." ;
proeth-prov:synthesisLiteral "appliedTo",
"balancingWith",
"concreteExpression",
"confidence",
"interpretation",
"principleClass",
"tensionResolution",
"textReferences" ;
rdfs:comment "Engineer B, retained by the municipality in litigation against Engineer A, produced a report that relied exclusively on depth-of-penetration analysis to conclude 19 piles were deficient while omitting wave equation analysis of driving records that would have supported Engineer A's position, and without consulting Engineer A's available representatives." ;
skos:definition "Engineer B, retained by the municipality in litigation against Engineer A, produced a report that relied exclusively on depth-of-penetration analysis to conclude 19 piles were deficient while omitting wave equation analysis of driving records that would have supported Engineer A's position, and without consulting Engineer A's available representatives." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 71 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 71 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
71
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00
First case
71
Generated
2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 71 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']
Generated by
ProEthica Case 71 Extraction