Engineer T Ethical Dilemma Error Acknowledgment vs Legal Counsel Direction
S · State
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#Engineer_T_Ethical_Dilemma_Error_Acknowledgment_vs_Legal_Counsel_Direction
Properties
Instance of
Active period
From deposition preparation through completion of deposition
Affected parties
Engineer T
Injured construction worker
XYZ Consulting Engineers
XYZ's attorneys
Confidence
0.85
Importance
high
Subject
Engineer T's tension between personal professional obligation to acknowledge a possible error and legal counsel's direction not to volunteer error characterizations
Terminated by
Engineer T's decision to respond factually without volunteering error acknowledgment, consistent with legal counsel's direction
Triggering event
Legal counsel directed Engineer T not to volunteer error characterizations while Engineer T believed the NSPE Code required error acknowledgment
Urgency level
high
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer T expressed a belief that a design error – i.e., not exploring alternative, safer design concepts – had been made and the NSPE Code of Ethics required that the error be acknowledged
Text references
Engineer T expressed a belief that a design error – i.e., not exploring alternative, safer design concepts – had been made and the NSPE Code of Ethics required that the error be acknowledged
Engineer T responded factually to all questions regarding the design and the design process
Engineer T was not asked if an error had been made and did not offer an acknowledgement of a possible error
The attorneys indicated that the legal process would determine whether, based on the facts, an error had been made, and that Engineer T should clearly report the facts, but should not voluntarily characterize the design work as an error
TTL
@prefix case9: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#> .
@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#> .
case9:Engineer_T_Ethical_Dilemma_Error_Acknowledgment_vs_Legal_Counsel_Direction a proeth:EthicalDilemma,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer T Ethical Dilemma Error Acknowledgment vs Legal Counsel Direction" ;
proeth:activeperiod "From deposition preparation through completion of deposition" ;
proeth:affectedparties "Engineer T",
"Injured construction worker",
"XYZ Consulting Engineers",
"XYZ's attorneys" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "State" ;
proeth:confidence "0.85" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-24T22:30:58.950003+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-24T22:30:58.950003+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer T expressed a belief that a design error – i.e., not exploring alternative, safer design concepts – had been made and the NSPE Code of Ethics required that the error be acknowledged" ;
proeth:stateclass "Ethical Dilemma" ;
proeth:subject "Engineer T's tension between personal professional obligation to acknowledge a possible error and legal counsel's direction not to volunteer error characterizations" ;
proeth:terminatedby "Engineer T's decision to respond factually without volunteering error acknowledgment, consistent with legal counsel's direction" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer T expressed a belief that a design error – i.e., not exploring alternative, safer design concepts – had been made and the NSPE Code of Ethics required that the error be acknowledged",
"Engineer T responded factually to all questions regarding the design and the design process",
"Engineer T was not asked if an error had been made and did not offer an acknowledgement of a possible error",
"The attorneys indicated that the legal process would determine whether, based on the facts, an error had been made, and that Engineer T should clearly report the facts, but should not voluntarily characterize the design work as an error" ;
proeth:triggeringevent "Legal counsel directed Engineer T not to volunteer error characterizations while Engineer T believed the NSPE Code required error acknowledgment" ;
proeth:urgencylevel "high" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 9 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-24T22:41:24.549469"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 9 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
9
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-02-24T22:30:58.950003+00:00
First case
9
Generated
2026-02-24T22:30:58.950003+00:00
Attributed to
Case 9 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-24T22:41:24.549469
Generated by
ProEthica Case 9 Extraction