Obligation-Conflict Resolution

Case 19-3 (2019) · Expert Witness—Chair of Standards and Safety Committee

Case Precedents
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 A Standards Committee Chair Expert Witness Conflict Disclosure to Attorney X prevails over Engineer A Volunteer Standards Role Non-Preclusion of Forensic Service
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Boiler Case Opposing Expert Shared Committee Leadership
  • Engineer A Boiler Code Chair Expert Witness Conflict Assessment
  • Engineer A Competing Duties - Committee Role vs Expert Role
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest - Committee Chair vs Opposing Expert
Engineer A Dual Role Appearance of Impropriety Management Committee Chair and Defense Expert prevails over Engineer A Volunteer Standards Role Non-Preclusion of Forensic Service
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Boiler Case Opposing Expert Shared Committee Leadership
  • Engineer A Boiler Code Chair Expert Witness Conflict Assessment
  • Engineer A Competing Duties - Committee Role vs Expert Role
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest - Committee Chair vs Opposing Expert
Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Forensic Expert Honesty and Integrity Obligation prevails over Engineer A Volunteer Standards Role Non-Preclusion of Forensic Service
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Boiler Case Opposing Expert Shared Committee Leadership
  • Engineer A Boiler Code Chair Expert Witness Conflict Assessment
  • Engineer A Competing Duties - Committee Role vs Expert Role
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest - Committee Chair vs Opposing Expert
Engineer A DOE Coal Bed Methane Expert Witness Credential Misrepresentation prevails over Engineer A DOE Coal Bed Methane Governmental Employee Private Consulting Conflict
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A DOE Coal Bed Methane Dual Role Conflict
Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Forensic Expert Objectivity Obligation prevails over Engineer A Forensic Expert Objectivity in Defense Retention Pressure Vessel Explosion
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Adversarial Expert Engagement State
  • Engineer A Adversarial Proceeding Expert Independence State
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest State - Personal vs Professional
Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Non-Communication with Engineer B Regarding Litigation prevails over Engineer A Forensic Expert Objectivity in Defense Retention Pressure Vessel Explosion
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Adversarial Expert Engagement State
  • Engineer A Adversarial Proceeding Expert Independence State
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest State - Personal vs Professional
Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Dual Disclosure to Attorney X prevails over Engineer A Volunteer Standards Role Non-Preclusion of Forensic Service
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A Boiler Case Opposing Expert Shared Committee Leadership
  • Engineer A Boiler Code Chair Expert Witness Conflict Assessment
  • Engineer A Competing Duties - Committee Role vs Expert Role
  • Engineer A Conflict of Interest - Committee Chair vs Opposing Expert
Engineer A DOE Coal Bed Methane Governmental Employee Private Consulting Conflict prevails over Engineer A DOT Traffic Engineer Airport Consulting Dual Role Conflict
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Engineer A State DOT Airport Consulting Dual Role Conflict
Open tensions recorded without a resolution: Engineer A DOT Traffic Engineer Airport Consulting Dual Role Conflict vs Engineer A Forensic Expert Objectivity in Defense Retention Pressure Vessel Explosion Engineer A Forensic Expert Objectivity in Defense Retention Pressure Vessel Explosion vs Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Dual Disclosure to Attorney X Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Expert Witness Conflict Disclosure to Attorney X vs Engineer A Standards Committee Chair Forensic Expert Objectivity Obligation
What the board concluded
  • Engineer A's role as a private forensic engineering expert should not present any clear or apparent conflict of interest.
  • Engineer A has an obligation to (1) fully disclose to Attorney X his role as the chairman of the boiler code standards and safety committee within an engineering society, and (2) advise Attorney X that Engineer B serves a member of one of the technical subcommittees within the boiler code standards and safety committee.
  • Engineer A has an obligation to be respectful of Engineer B in his role as a member of one of the technical subcommittees within the boiler code standards and safety committee and also not engage in any written or verbal exchanges with Engineer B regarding the pending litigation without direction from legal counsel.

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3 | Report Issue