Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 74-2 (1974) · Conflict of Interest - Municipal Engineer
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
Engineer-to-Client Relationship Prerequisite — Consulting Firm Principal as Municipal Engineer
prevails over
Consulting Engineer Non-Employee Status Recognition — Small Municipality Statutory Compliance
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Small Municipality Consultant-Municipal-Engineer Appointment
Dual-Role City Engineer Self-Review Non-Performance Structural Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
prevails over
Small Municipality Dual-Role Arrangement Public Interest Justification Recognition — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Small Municipality Resource Constraint Preventing Full-Time Engineer
Featured
Advisory Engagement Self-Interest Conflict Disclosure — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
prevails over
Service Continuity Public Interest Recognition — Municipal Engineer Dual-Role Permissibility
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Small Municipality Resource Constraint Preventing Full-Time Engineer
Dual-Role Municipal Engineer Contractor Selection Non-Participation — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
prevails over
Low-Retainer Municipal Engineer Competitive Constraint Acceptance — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Municipal Engineer Capital Project Follow-On Retention
Dual-Role City Engineer Self-Review Non-Performance Structural Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
prevails over
Part-Time Municipal Engineer Dual-Role Advisory-Design Ethical Permissibility Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Dual Public-Private Role Structural Conflict
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Advisory Engagement Self-Interest Conflict Disclosure — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Dual-Role City Engineer Advisory Loyalty Non-Division — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
Dual-Role City Engineer Advisory Loyalty Non-Division — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Service Continuity Public Interest Recognition — Municipal Engineer Dual-Role Permissibility
Dual-Role City Engineer Self-Review Non-Performance Structural Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Engineer-to-Client Relationship Prerequisite — Consulting Firm Principal as Municipal Engineer
Dual-Role City Engineer Self-Review Non-Performance Structural Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Municipal Client Self-Review Waiver Right Recognition — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
Dual-Role City Engineer Self-Review Non-Performance Structural Boundary — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Small Municipality Engineering Service Access Public Welfare Facilitation — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
Dual-Role Municipal Engineer Contractor Selection Non-Participation — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Small Municipality Dual-Role Arrangement Public Interest Justification Recognition — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
Low-Retainer Municipal Engineer Competitive Constraint Acceptance — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case vs Small Municipality Dual-Role Arrangement Public Interest Justification Recognition — State Municipal Engineer Mandate Case
What the board concluded
- Because it is considered that the engineer, in this case, is not a bona fide "employee" of the municipality but a consultant called the "municipal engineer," whose compensation is on a retainer or fee basis, it is not unethical for him to serve as the "municipal engineer" and participate in a consulting firm providing engineering services to the same municipality under the conditions stated above.