Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 22-1 (2022) · Unlicensed Practice by Nonengineers with “Engineer” in Job Titles
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 Qualifications Non-Falsification Obligation Instance
prevails over
State Agency Engineering Title Misrepresentation Non-Facilitation Obligation Instance
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Non-Engineer B Unlicensed Title and Review Authority
Engineer A Sealed Document Non-Subordination to Transportation Engineer B Direction
prevails over
Engineer A Non-Aiding Unlawful Practice by Transportation Engineer B
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Licensed Engineer Directed by Unlicensed Reviewer
Engineer A Sealed Document Non-Subordination Obligation Instance
prevails over
Engineer A Non-Aiding Unlicensed Practice Obligation Instance
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Licensed Engineer A Directed by Unlicensed Reviewer
BER Case 92-2 EI Timely Misrepresentation Correction Escalation Obligation Instance
prevails over
BER Case 92-2 EI Engineer Intern Misrepresentation Correction Obligation Instance
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer Intern Credential Misrepresentation in Firm Advertising
Engineer A Public Welfare Safety Escalation Regarding Systemic Unqualified Review Practice
prevails over
Engineer A Unlicensed Practice Reporting of Transportation Engineer B to Licensing Board
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Profession-Wide Title Integrity Erosion from Agency Practice
Engineer A Public Welfare Safety Escalation Obligation Instance
prevails over
Engineer A Unlicensed Practice Reporting Obligation Instance
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Unlicensed Practice Reporting Obligation
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Unlicensed Practice Challenge Against Transportation Engineer B vs Engineer A Unlicensed Practice Reporting of Transportation Engineer B to Licensing Board
What the board concluded
- It is unlawful and therefore not ethical for “Transportation Engineer” B to engage in the practice of engineering without having fulfilled the requirements for licensure: adequate education, rigorous examination, and substantial experience.