Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 90-4 (1990) · Misrepresentation Of Firm's Staff
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
Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Test Applied to Engineer X Listing in Firm Y Brochure
prevails over
Engineer Z Continued Brochure Distribution After Engineer X Notice — Non-Key-Employee Materiality Assessment
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Firm Y Brochure Continued Listing of Departed Engineer X
Engineer Z Voluntary Resignation Notice-Period Non-Key-Employee Brochure Conditional Permissibility Assessment
prevails over
Engineer Z Marketing Material Ongoing Accuracy Maintenance — Engineer X Personnel Currency
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Firm Y Intent Assessment — Oversight vs. Enhancement
Case-by-Case Pertinence Assessment Distinguishing BER 83-1 from Present Case
prevails over
Key Employee Brochure Listing Violation by Engineer B in BER 83-1
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer X Departure from Firm Y — Brochure Not Updated
Intent-and-Purpose Non-Satisfaction Non-Violation Recognition for Engineer Z Firm Y
prevails over
Truthful Non-Deceptive Advertising Obligation Grounding Firm Y Brochure Analysis
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Firm Y Intent Assessment — Oversight vs. Enhancement
Non-Key-Employee Brochure Listing Contextual Permissibility Applied to Engineer X
prevails over
Key Employee Brochure Listing Violation by Engineer B in BER 83-1
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer X Departure from Firm Y — Brochure Not Updated
Engineer Z Post-Notice-Period Non-Key-Employee Brochure Listing Expeditious Correction — Engineer X
prevails over
Oversight-Without-Malice Non-Condoning Inadvertent Inaccuracy Correction for Firm Y
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Firm Y Intent Assessment — Oversight vs. Enhancement
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer X Departed Engineer Credential Misuse Correction Obligation — Firm Y Brochure vs Engineer Z Expeditious Correction Obligation Upon Engineer X Departure Notice
Engineer Z Continued Brochure Distribution After Engineer X Notice — Non-Key-Employee Materiality Assessment vs Engineer Z Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Test Application to Engineer X Brochure Listing
Engineer Z Expeditious Correction Obligation Upon Engineer X Departure Notice vs Engineer Z Voluntary Resignation Notice-Period Non-Key-Employee Brochure Conditional Permissibility Assessment
Engineer Z Expeditious Correction Obligation Upon Engineer X Departure Notice vs Non-Key-Employee Brochure Listing Contextual Permissibility Applied to Engineer X
Engineer Z Voluntary Resignation Notice-Period Non-Key-Employee Brochure Conditional Permissibility Assessment vs Errata Sheet Utilization Obligation for Firm Y Printed Brochures
Engineer Z Voluntary Resignation Notice-Period Non-Key-Employee Brochure Conditional Permissibility Assessment vs Truthful Non-Deceptive Advertising Obligation Grounding Firm Y Brochure Analysis
Expeditious Correction Obligation for Firm Y Post-Departure Marketing Materials vs Oversight-Without-Malice Non-Condoning Inadvertent Inaccuracy Correction for Firm Y
Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Test Applied to Engineer X Listing in Firm Y Brochure vs Truthful Non-Deceptive Advertising Obligation Grounding Firm Y Brochure Analysis
What the board concluded
- It was not unethical for Engineer Z to continue to represent Engineer X as an employee of Firm Y under the circumstances described.
How comparable cases resolved the same tension
Engineer Z Continued Brochure Distribution After Engineer X Notice — Non-Key-Employee Materiality Assessment yields to Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Test Applied to Engineer X Listing in Firm Y Brochure. The yielding obligation ("Engineer Z Continued Brochure Distribution After Engineer X Notice — Non-Key-Employee Materiality Assessment") 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) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
97-11
Duty To Disclose Disciplinary Complaint To Client
|
Engineer B Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Test Violation Case 83-1 Post-Termination | Engineer B Post-Termination Notice Brochure Personnel Disclosure Case 83-1 Notice Period | -- |
|
83-1
Conflict Of Interest - Duty of Loyalty of...
|
Engineer B Post-Actual-Departure Brochure Cessation Absolute BER-82 | Engineer B Notice-Period Active-Negotiation Key-Employee Departure Disclosure BER-82 | Engineer B Post-Departure Brochure Continued Use; Engineer B Post-Termination Brochure Continued Use |
|
92-6
Public Welfare - Hazardous Waste
|
Engineer B Hazardous Waste Federal State Authority Notification | Engineer B Business Relationship Non-Subordination Hazardous Material Disclosure | Engineer B Business-Relationship-Driven Vague Hazard Communication |
|
03-6
Employment—Duty To Disclose Revocation Of...
|
Engineer F Adjudicated Misconduct Employment Application Disclosure | Engineer F Employer Question Intent Broad Interpretation Failure | -- |
|
90-6
Use Of Cadd System
|
BER Code Prevailing Practice Conformance | Engineer B Detailed Review Sealing Subordinate Work | Engineer CADD Document Sealing Review Adequacy |