Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 75-5 (1975) · Personal Misconduct
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
NSPE BER Case 72-6 Ethics Code Expansive Jurisdiction Personal Misconduct Resolution
prevails over
NSPE BER Case 72-6 Professional Society Judiciousness Personal Conduct Discipline Caveat
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- NSPE Disciplinary Jurisdiction Over Engineer Criminal Misconduct
NSPE BER Case 72-6 Public Confidence Ethics Code Foundational Purpose Invocation
prevails over
NSPE BER Case 72-6 Professional Society Judiciousness Personal Conduct Discipline Caveat
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- NSPE Disciplinary Jurisdiction Over Engineer Criminal Misconduct
Engineer B Public Professional Identification Criminal Conduct Profession Reputational Duty
prevails over
Engineer B Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer B Public Professional Identity Exposure State
- Engineer B Tax Fraud Conviction State
Engineer A Probationary Employment Context Fraud Aggravated Ethics Violation
prevails over
Engineer A Criminal Conviction Employment Acceptance Honest Disclosure
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Whole-Person Integrity Scrutiny State
Engineer A Case 72-6 Profession Honor Dignity Personal Conduct Violation
prevails over
Engineer A Case 72-6 Criminal Conviction Employment Honest Disclosure Violation
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Theft Conviction and Probation State
Featured
Engineer B Criminal Conviction Dishonesty Character Incompatibility Ethics Reporting
prevails over
Engineer B Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer B Public Professional Identity Exposure State
- Engineer B Tax Fraud Conviction State
Engineer A Criminal Conviction Dishonesty Character Incompatibility Ethics Reporting
prevails over
Engineer A Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Repeated Criminal Conduct During Probation State
- Engineer A Theft Conviction and Probation State
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Criminal Conviction Employment Acceptance Honest Disclosure vs Engineer A Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition
Engineer B Case 72-6 Profession Honor Dignity Personal Conduct Violation vs Engineer B Personal Misconduct Ethics Code Jurisdiction Recognition
What the board concluded
- Personal misconduct of the types described is a violation of the Code of Ethics.