Litigation Neutrality Principle
Class
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#LitigationNeutralityPrinciple
Class Hierarchy
- Thing
- ↳ entity (bfo)
- ↳ continuant (bfo)
- ↳ generically dependent continuant (bfo)
- ↳ information content entity (iao)
- ↳ directive information entity (iao)
- ↳ Principle (proethica-core)
- ↳ Relational Principle (proethica-intermediate)
- ↳ LitigationNeutralityPrinciple
Definition
Professional principle requiring engineers retained as expert witnesses or technical investigators in litigation or mediation to render opinions based solely on technical analysis and available evidence, without shaping findings to favor the retaining party's legal position. The engineer's duty to provide objective technical analysis is not displaced by the adversarial context of the engagement.
Case Provenance
Discovered in
This class was discovered during extraction of the case(s) above; the supporting verbatim quotes are in Source Evidence.
Properties
Abstract Nature
Requires balancing the legitimate role of advocacy in adversarial proceedings against the engineer's independent professional obligation to render technically honest opinions.
Confidence
0.86
Derived Obligations
Apply all relevant analytical methods, not only those supporting the retaining party's position
Decline to omit material technical findings because they are unhelpful to the retaining party
Disclose evidence that contradicts the conclusions being offered
Extensional Examples
Engineer B's selective reliance on one analytical method while omitting wave equation results that contradicted the conclusion favoring the retaining municipality
Operationalization
Requires expert engineers to consider and disclose all material evidence, apply all relevant analytical methods, and present conclusions that reflect the full technical picture rather than only the evidence supporting the retaining party.
Potential Conflicts
Faithful Agent Duty Principle
Loyalty to retaining client
Principle Category
relational
Value Basis
Courts, mediators, and opposing parties rely on expert engineers to provide technically honest analysis. Advocacy-shaped expert opinions corrupt the fact-finding process and undermine public trust in the profession.
Property Structure
1 · Object and Data Properties
rdfs:domain on this class or ancestor
| Property | Range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| establishedBy inherited | CodeProvision | Indicates which code provision establishes this ethical concept. |
| invokedBy inherited | Agent | Relates a Principle to the Agent(s) that invoke it in the case scenario (the parties who appeal to the principle to justify or evaluate conduct). May name several agents. |
2 · Definitional Attributes
SHACL definitional shape
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| principle kind | principleCategory | The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal. |
| extensional cases | extensionalCases | Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field. |
3 · Bearer Attributes
SHACL property shape
individual data
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| interpretation | interpretation | Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| concrete expression | concreteExpression | How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| applied to | appliedTo | What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on). |
| balancing with | balancingWith | The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field. |
| tension resolution | tensionResolution | How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| invoked by | invokedBy | The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent. |
4 · Referenced By
rdfs:range on this class or ancestor
| From | Property | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Action | guidedByPrinciple inherited | Relates an action to a principle that directs it. The principle supplies the value the action is taken to serve. |
| Code Provision | establishes inherited | Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (principles, obligations, constraints) it establishes or defines. |
| Obligation | derivedFromPrinciple inherited | Relates an obligation to the principle or principles it operationalizes. The obligation gives concrete directive force to the more abstract value the principle expresses (Dennis et al. 2016). |
| Role | adheresToPrinciple inherited | Relates a role to principles that guide its conduct; the role-relative applicability edge of the R->P->O chain (the role determines which principles apply to conduct in that standing). |
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.
Source text
Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations.
Used in cases 1
Case ontologies that instantiate this class or one of its base-ontology descendants. Computed from each individual's type, so the list stays current as cases are extracted. The originating case is shown under Extraction details.
Case 71@prefix core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix pcsh: <http://proethica.org/shapes/core#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@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 sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
proeth:LitigationNeutralityPrinciple a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Litigation Neutrality Principle" ;
proeth:abstractNature "Requires balancing the legitimate role of advocacy in adversarial proceedings against the engineer's independent professional obligation to render technically honest opinions." ;
proeth:confidence "0.86" ;
proeth:derivedObligations "Apply all relevant analytical methods, not only those supporting the retaining party's position",
"Decline to omit material technical findings because they are unhelpful to the retaining party",
"Disclose evidence that contradicts the conclusions being offered" ;
proeth:extensionalExamples "Engineer B's selective reliance on one analytical method while omitting wave equation results that contradicted the conclusion favoring the retaining municipality" ;
proeth:operationalization "Requires expert engineers to consider and disclose all material evidence, apply all relevant analytical methods, and present conclusions that reflect the full technical picture rather than only the evidence supporting the retaining party." ;
proeth:potentialConflicts "Faithful Agent Duty Principle",
"Loyalty to retaining client" ;
proeth:principleCategory "relational" ;
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." ;
proeth:valueBasis "Courts, mediators, and opposing parties rely on expert engineers to provide technically honest analysis. Advocacy-shaped expert opinions corrupt the fact-finding process and undermine public trust in the profession." ;
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's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations." ;
rdfs:comment "Professional principle requiring engineers retained as expert witnesses or technical investigators in litigation or mediation to render opinions based solely on technical analysis and available evidence, without shaping findings to favor the retaining party's legal position. The engineer's duty to provide objective technical analysis is not displaced by the adversarial context of the engagement." ;
rdfs:subClassOf proeth:RelationalPrinciple ;
skos:definition "Professional principle requiring engineers retained as expert witnesses or technical investigators in litigation or mediation to render opinions based solely on technical analysis and available evidence, without shaping findings to favor the retaining party's legal position. The engineer's duty to provide objective technical analysis is not displaced by the adversarial context of the engagement." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 71 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" .
pcsh:CaseAnnotationShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Shared per-case annotation schema (all nine components)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "The cross-component annotation fields on committed case individuals: proeth:confidence (extraction confidence, decimal; all components except Action, whose Step-3 contract carries no confidence field), proeth:textReferences (verbatim supporting quotes, universal), proeth-prov sourceText (the source snippet, on the Step-1/2 provenance layers; Step-3 A/E individuals ground via textReferences only), and the involvement gloss (proeth:caseInvolvement on role individuals, proeth:caseContext on obligation, capability, and constraint individuals). Values are per-individual; the fields do not individuate any type."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Extraction confidence for this individual (0 to 1)." ;
sh:name "confidence" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:confidence ],
[ sh:description "Verbatim case quotes supporting this individual." ;
sh:name "text references" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:textReferences ],
[ sh:description "How this individual figures in the case narrative (role individuals; the same text is routed into rdfs:comment)." ;
sh:name "case involvement" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:caseInvolvement ],
[ sh:description "Grounding context in this case (obligation, capability, and constraint individuals)." ;
sh:name "case context" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:caseContext ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Action,
core:Capability,
core:Constraint,
core:Event,
core:Obligation,
core:Principle,
core:Resource,
core:Role,
core:State .
pcsh:PrincipleDefinitionShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle definition schema (type-level, descriptive, field contract)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What individuates a principle TYPE: its canonical kind (drives the four-kind subClassOf typing; the canonical leaf becomes the rdf:type) and the extensional cases that ground it (McLaren). The five per-case narrative literals and the invokedBy edge are per-individual and now declared on PrinciplePropertyShape, mirroring the RoleDefinitionShape/ProfessionalRolePropertyShape split so the {{ principle_schema }} prompt separates the type judgment from what the case supplies. Descriptive only (no validation result); principle_category is a routing input, not stored as a literal."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal." ;
sh:name "principle kind" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:principleCategory ],
[ sh:description "Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field." ;
sh:name "extensional cases" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:extensionalCases ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
pcsh:PrinciplePropertyShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle per-case schema (individual data, non-definitional)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What a principle INDIVIDUAL is described by in a specific case: the five narrative literals the defeasibility pipeline consumes and the agent that invokes it. These do NOT individuate the principle TYPE (that is PrincipleDefinitionShape); their values are per-case, asserted on the individual. Descriptive only."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "interpretation" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:interpretation ],
[ sh:description "How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "concrete expression" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:concreteExpression ],
[ sh:description "What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on)." ;
sh:name "applied to" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:appliedTo ],
[ sh:description "The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field." ;
sh:name "balancing with" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:balancingWith ],
[ sh:description "How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "tension resolution" ;
sh:order 5 ;
sh:path proeth:tensionResolution ],
[ sh:description "The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent." ;
sh:name "invoked by" ;
sh:order 6 ;
sh:path core:invokedBy ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
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
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Generated
2026-06-04T14:30:07.628947+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 71 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']