Fact-Based Disclosure Obligation In Deposition Context
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#Fact-Based_Disclosure_Obligation_In_Deposition_Context
Properties
Instance of
Fact-BasedDisclosureObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Fact-BasedDisclosureObligation
Applied to
Deposition testimony regarding design process and design approach selection
Balancing with
Deposition Truthfulness Without Voluntary Self-Characterization
Error Acknowledgment and Corrective Disclosure Obligation
Intellectual Honesty
Concrete expression
The attorneys advised Engineer T to report all facts completely and transparently in the deposition while refraining from volunteering a characterization of the design work as an error, distinguishing between factual disclosure (required) and professional error characterization (appropriately left to the legal process)
Confidence
0.87
Importance
high
Interpretation
In the deposition context, the fact-based disclosure obligation required complete and accurate factual reporting of the design process, including the conversation with Engineer B about potential error, while the characterization of whether those facts constitute an error was treated as a legal determination rather than a factual disclosure
Invoked by
Engineer T Deponent Engineer in Legal Proceedings
Tension resolution
The attorneys' guidance distinguished factual disclosure from error characterization, allowing Engineer T to satisfy the disclosure obligation through complete factual testimony while leaving error determination to the legal process
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer T should clearly report the facts, but should not voluntarily characterize the design work as an error.
Text references
Both of XYZ Consulting Engineers' attorneys agreed that a clear obligation existed not to distort or alter any facts, and that Engineer T should respond to questions with complete transparency during the deposition.
In the deposition, Engineer T responded factually to all questions regarding the design and the design process.
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:Fact-Based_Disclosure_Obligation_In_Deposition_Context a proeth:Fact-BasedDisclosureObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Fact-Based Disclosure Obligation In Deposition Context" ;
proeth:appliedto "Deposition testimony regarding design process and design approach selection" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Deposition Truthfulness Without Voluntary Self-Characterization",
"Error Acknowledgment and Corrective Disclosure Obligation",
"Intellectual Honesty" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The attorneys advised Engineer T to report all facts completely and transparently in the deposition while refraining from volunteering a characterization of the design work as an error, distinguishing between factual disclosure (required) and professional error characterization (appropriately left to the legal process)" ;
proeth:confidence "0.87" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-24T22:33:49.422835+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-24T22:33:49.422835+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "In the deposition context, the fact-based disclosure obligation required complete and accurate factual reporting of the design process, including the conversation with Engineer B about potential error, while the characterization of whether those facts constitute an error was treated as a legal determination rather than a factual disclosure" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer T Deponent Engineer in Legal Proceedings" ;
proeth:principleclass "Fact-Based Disclosure Obligation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer T should clearly report the facts, but should not voluntarily characterize the design work as an error." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The attorneys' guidance distinguished factual disclosure from error characterization, allowing Engineer T to satisfy the disclosure obligation through complete factual testimony while leaving error determination to the legal process" ;
proeth:textreferences "Both of XYZ Consulting Engineers' attorneys agreed that a clear obligation existed not to distort or alter any facts, and that Engineer T should respond to questions with complete transparency during the deposition.",
"In the deposition, Engineer T responded factually to all questions regarding the design and the design process.",
"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:wasattributedto "Case 9 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-24T22:41:24.554377"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 9 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
9
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-02-24T22:33:49.422835+00:00
First case
9
Generated
2026-02-24T22:33:49.422835+00:00
Attributed to
Case 9 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-24T22:41:24.554377
Generated by
ProEthica Case 9 Extraction