Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 89-7 (1989) · Duty To Report Safety Violations
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 A Post-Client-Override Public Safety Escalation Failure
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Section II.1.c. Exception Clause Non-Activation Violation
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Featured
Engineer A Confidentiality Agreement Non-Excuse Safety Code Violation Reporting
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Passive Acquiescence Independent Ethical Failure
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Out-of-Discipline Electrical Mechanical Code Violation Public Authority Reporting
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Client Safety Violation Insistence or Project Withdrawal
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A As-Is Sale Directive Safety Reporting Non-Override
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Going-Along After Client Safety Refusal Independent Ethical Violation
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Appropriate Authority Notification After Client Safety Override Failure
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Engineer A Paramount Safety Word Supremacy Hierarchy Non-Recognition
prevails over
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Confidentiality Obligation vs. Occupant Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Code-Based Confidentiality Exception Activation
- Engineer A Confidentiality vs. Public Safety Competing Duties
- Engineer A Paramount Safety Obligation Notification Duty
- Out-of-Scope Code Violation Disclosure in Occupied Building Sale
- Public Safety at Risk from Known Code Violations in Occupied Building
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Client Safety Violation Insistence or Withdrawal Failure vs Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
Engineer A Competing Confidentiality Safety Code Provision Contextual Balancing vs Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
Engineer A Faithful Agent Role Misapplication to Confidentiality Absolutism vs Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
Engineer A Occupied Building Electrical Mechanical Violation Occupant Escalation vs Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
Engineer A Passive Acquiescence Known Safety Violation Independent Ethical Failure vs Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition
Engineer A Section III.4 Client-Transmitted Confidentiality Engagement Recognition vs Engineer A Tenant Occupant Direct Notification Electrical Mechanical Violations
What the board concluded
- It was unethical for Engineer A not to report the safety violations to the appropriate public authorities.