Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 83-1 (1983) · Conflict Of Interest - Duty of Loyalty of Terminated Employed Engineer to Employer - Misleading Brochure
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 B Post-Actual-Termination Brochure Personnel Listing Prohibition
prevails over
Engineer B Notice-Period Active-Negotiation Key-Employee Departure Disclosure BER-82
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer B Post-Departure Brochure Continued Use
- Engineer B Post-Termination Brochure Continued Use
Engineer A Questionable Competition Methods Covert Solicitation BER-82
prevails over
Engineer A Employer-Initiated Termination Pre-Departure Client Solicitation Permissibility
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Active Client Solicitation During Continued Employment
- Engineer A Covert Current-Client Solicitation While Employed
- Engineer A Pending Termination Notice Active Employment Continuation
- Engineer A Specialized Knowledge Solicitation Risk
Featured
Engineer A Pre-Departure Competitive Solicitation Employer Disclosure BER-82
prevails over
Engineer A Employer-Initiated Termination Pre-Departure Client Solicitation Permissibility
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Active Client Solicitation During Continued Employment
- Engineer A Covert Current-Client Solicitation While Employed
- Engineer A Pending Termination Notice Active Employment Continuation
- Engineer A Specialized Knowledge Solicitation Risk
Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty During Notice Period BER-82
prevails over
Engineer A Employer-Initiated Termination Pre-Departure Client Solicitation Permissibility
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Active Client Solicitation During Continued Employment
- Engineer A Covert Current-Client Solicitation While Employed
- Engineer A Pending Termination Notice Active Employment Continuation
- Engineer A Specialized Knowledge Solicitation Risk
Engineer B Post-Actual-Departure Brochure Cessation Absolute BER-82
prevails over
Engineer B Notice-Period Active-Negotiation Key-Employee Departure Disclosure BER-82
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer B Post-Departure Brochure Continued Use
- Engineer B Post-Termination Brochure Continued Use
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Employer-Initiated Termination Pre-Departure Client Solicitation Permissibility vs Engineer A Faithful Agent Notice-Period Boundary
Engineer A Employer-Initiated Termination Pre-Departure Client Solicitation Permissibility vs Engineer A Specialized Knowledge Employer Disclosure Before Competitive Use BER-82
Engineer A Post-Departure Former-Client Solicitation Permissibility Boundary BER-82 vs Engineer A Specialized Knowledge Post-Departure Competition Constraint
Engineer B Notice-Period Active-Negotiation Key-Employee Departure Disclosure BER-82 vs Engineer B Pertinent Fact Dual-Element Misrepresentation Test Brochure BER-82
What the board concluded
- It was unethical for Engineer A to notify clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start a firm and would appreciate being considered for work while still in the employ of Engineer B.
- It was not unethical for Engineer B to distribute a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee provided Engineer B apprised the prospective client during the negotiation of Engineer A's pending termination.
- It was unethical for Engineer B to distribute a brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee after Engineer A's actual termination.