Engineer A Retained Selective Emphasis Environmental Benefit Non-Deceptive Presentation Developer F
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#Engineer_A_Retained_Selective_Emphasis_Environmental_Benefit_Non-Deceptive_Presentation_Developer_F
Properties
Instance of
RetainedEngineerSelectiveEmphasisEnvironmentalBenefitNon-DeceptivePresentationObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#RetainedEngineerSelectiveEmphasisEnvironmentalBenefitNon-DeceptivePresentationObligation
Case context
Engineer A presents the waterfront development project by highlighting the environmental benefit of converting industrial waterfront to parkland, while not volunteering known adverse impacts. The presentation is selective but not affirmatively deceptive, and the multi-witness hearing process supplies the missing adverse impact information through other engineers.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.85
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to ensure that selective emphasis on the environmental benefits of converting the industrial waterfront to parkland did not create a materially false or deceptive impression about the project's overall public welfare effects, including known adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts.
Temporal scope
During the public hearing presentation to the City Planning Board
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Awareness of Undisclosed Development Impacts
derivedFromPrinciple
Objectivity Principle Applied to Engineer As Client-Retained Presentation
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A highlights the improved environmental effect of converting the waterfront from an industrial facility to a parkland.
Text references
But it is also true the anticipated commercial development could increase traffic, as well as air and noise pollution.
Engineer A highlights the improved environmental effect of converting the waterfront from an industrial facility to a parkland.
Engineer A is aware of these factors, but was not specifically questioned on these factors and does not volunteer this fact.
TTL
@prefix case94: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#> .
@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 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#> .
case94:Engineer_A_Retained_Selective_Emphasis_Environmental_Benefit_Non-Deceptive_Presentation_Developer_F a proeth:RetainedEngineerSelectiveEmphasisEnvironmentalBenefitNon-DeceptivePresentationObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Retained Selective Emphasis Environmental Benefit Non-Deceptive Presentation Developer F" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case94:Engineer_A_Awareness_of_Undisclosed_Development_Impacts ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A presents the waterfront development project by highlighting the environmental benefit of converting industrial waterfront to parkland, while not volunteering known adverse impacts. The presentation is selective but not affirmatively deceptive, and the multi-witness hearing process supplies the missing adverse impact information through other engineers." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.85" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case94:Objectivity_Principle_Applied_to_Engineer_As_Client-Retained_Presentation ;
proeth:discoveredincase "94" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T20:41:56.542419+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "94" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T20:41:56.542419+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Retained Engineer Selective Emphasis Environmental Benefit Non-Deceptive Presentation Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to ensure that selective emphasis on the environmental benefits of converting the industrial waterfront to parkland did not create a materially false or deceptive impression about the project's overall public welfare effects, including known adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A highlights the improved environmental effect of converting the waterfront from an industrial facility to a parkland." ;
proeth:temporalscope "During the public hearing presentation to the City Planning Board" ;
proeth:textreferences "But it is also true the anticipated commercial development could increase traffic, as well as air and noise pollution.",
"Engineer A highlights the improved environmental effect of converting the waterfront from an industrial facility to a parkland.",
"Engineer A is aware of these factors, but was not specifically questioned on these factors and does not volunteer this fact." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 94 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T20:55:42.367594"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 94 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
94
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-02-28T20:41:56.542419+00:00
First case
94
Generated
2026-02-28T20:41:56.542419+00:00
Attributed to
Case 94 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T20:55:42.367594
Generated by
ProEthica Case 94 Extraction