Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 03-6 (2003) · Employment—Duty To Disclose Revocation Of Contractor License
Professional obligations conflict, and the board applies no fixed rule for which one wins.
Each resolution is recorded as three edges:
competesWith (the tension),
prevailsOver (the obligation the board allowed to win in this case), and
defeasibleUnder (the situation under which the yielding obligation gives way).
The same tension is then traced across comparable cases, where its resolution shifts with context.
Hover any obligation or state to see its definition; click to open it in OntServe.
How this case resolved it
Featured
Engineer F Non-Engineering License Disciplinary History Employment Disclosure Failure
prevails over
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- BER 75-5 Whole-Person Integrity Standard Activation
- BER 97-11 vs Present Case Allegation-Adjudication Threshold Differential
- Engineer F Adjudicated Wrongdoing Disclosure Obligation
- Engineer F Cross-Domain License Revocation Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employer Trust Undermined by Initial Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employment Application Narrow Question Omission
- Engineer F Fire Protection Safety Domain Heightened Materiality
- Engineer F Narrow Application Question Exploitable Omission
- Engineer F Non-PE License Revocation Integrity Relevance
- Engineer F Privacy vs. Material Omission Tension
Engineer F Qualifications Non-Misrepresentation Employment Application
prevails over
Engineer F Artfully Misleading Employment Application Answer
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer F Employment Application Narrow Question Omission
Engineer F Domain-Relevance Amplified Fire Protection Disclosure Failure
prevails over
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- BER 75-5 Whole-Person Integrity Standard Activation
- BER 97-11 vs Present Case Allegation-Adjudication Threshold Differential
- Engineer F Adjudicated Wrongdoing Disclosure Obligation
- Engineer F Cross-Domain License Revocation Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employer Trust Undermined by Initial Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employment Application Narrow Question Omission
- Engineer F Fire Protection Safety Domain Heightened Materiality
- Engineer F Narrow Application Question Exploitable Omission
- Engineer F Non-PE License Revocation Integrity Relevance
- Engineer F Privacy vs. Material Omission Tension
Engineer F Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition Failure
prevails over
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- BER 75-5 Whole-Person Integrity Standard Activation
- BER 97-11 vs Present Case Allegation-Adjudication Threshold Differential
- Engineer F Adjudicated Wrongdoing Disclosure Obligation
- Engineer F Cross-Domain License Revocation Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employer Trust Undermined by Initial Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employment Application Narrow Question Omission
- Engineer F Fire Protection Safety Domain Heightened Materiality
- Engineer F Narrow Application Question Exploitable Omission
- Engineer F Non-PE License Revocation Integrity Relevance
- Engineer F Privacy vs. Material Omission Tension
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure
prevails over
Engineer F Employer Question Intent Broad Interpretation Failure
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
No State context committed for this edge.
Engineer F Ethics Code Supersession of Legalistic Minimum Employment Disclosure
prevails over
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- BER 75-5 Whole-Person Integrity Standard Activation
- BER 97-11 vs Present Case Allegation-Adjudication Threshold Differential
- Engineer F Adjudicated Wrongdoing Disclosure Obligation
- Engineer F Cross-Domain License Revocation Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employer Trust Undermined by Initial Non-Disclosure
- Engineer F Employment Application Narrow Question Omission
- Engineer F Fire Protection Safety Domain Heightened Materiality
- Engineer F Narrow Application Question Exploitable Omission
- Engineer F Non-PE License Revocation Integrity Relevance
- Engineer F Privacy vs. Material Omission Tension
Engineer F Contractor License Revocation Non-Disclosure Employment Application
prevails over
Engineering Firm Hiring Authority Broad Disciplinary Inquiry Due Diligence
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
No State context committed for this edge.
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Pending Complaint Limited Background Information Prudential Weighing BER 97-11 vs Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure
What the board concluded
- Engineer F had an ethical obligation to report on the employment application the revocation of his contractor’s license.
How comparable cases resolved the same tension
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure yields to Engineer F Non-Engineering License Disciplinary History Employment Disclosure Failure. The yielding obligation ("Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure Failure") recurs across cases; the obligation that overrides it and the context under which it yields differ case by case. This is the case-law move: not a single rule, but a family of context-indexed resolutions.
| Case | Obligation that prevailed | Yielding obligation | Context (defeasibleUnder) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
75-5
Personal Misconduct
|
Engineer A Case 72-6 Profession Honor Dignity Personal Conduct Violation | Engineer A Case 72-6 Criminal Conviction Employment Honest Disclosure Violation | Engineer A Theft Conviction and Probation State |
|
22-4
Duty to Report Misconduct
|
Engineer A Proportionate Characterization State Q Proposal Analysis | Competitor Qualification Proposal Misconduct Reporting Obligation Engineer A State Q | Engineer A Multi-Jurisdiction Rule Stringency Differential; Engineer B State Q Attribution Ambiguity |
|
01-1
Employment—Questioning Ability Of Former Employer
|
Engineer B Self-Policing Peer Misconduct Reporting Obligation | Engineer B Competitive Peer Misconduct Reporting Motivation Transparency | Firm X Conflict of Interest State — Engineer A Competitive Conduct |
|
04-11
Advertising — Use of Business Cards—P.E....
|
Engineer A Situation 4 Social Context Non-Violation Recognition | Engineer D Situation 4 Improper Complaint Filing Prohibition | -- |
|
19-1
Disclosure of Personal Information
|
Present Case Engineer A Personal Condition vs Engineering Conduct Distinction | BER 03-6 Engineer F Contractor License Revocation Non-Disclosure Violation | -- |