This page shows the pre-commit working store (the raw extraction under review). This case was committed to OntServe on 2026-10-24 07:57; the committed record differs by design (deduplication, typing, and agent binding are applied at commit). View the committed record
Overview
Facts Discussion
Provenance Draft

PASS 1: Contextual Framework Facts Section

Case 126: Appropriate Notification And Review Of Another Engineer's Work

R Roles
0
Classes
4
Individuals
S States
6
Classes
6
Individuals
Rs Resources
0
Classes
0
Individuals

Extracted Ontology Entities

16 RDF entities extracted organized by concept type

R Roles

Roles Classes
0
No new roles classes were identified in this section.
Roles Individuals
4
No new roles classes were discovered - the 4 individual(s) below reference existing classes from the ontology.
Linked
Engineer Role
C126
Text References:
"the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities t..."
"Engineer B reviews the design information the following week"
"notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review"
Confidence: 0.92
Actor: Engineer B
Role Class: Engineer Role
Role Category: provider_client
Role Kind: professional
Specialty: Review of engineering design work
Case Involvement: Retained by the franchiser, before Engineer A's contract expires, to provide immediate review of pending design concerns. Instructed not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A, but after the review notifies Engineer A of the relationship and the preliminary results of his review.
Client instruction: Franchiser specifically told Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A his relationship with the franchiser
Hasclient: Franchiser
"retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the ..."
Reviewsworkof: Engineer A
"Engineer B reviews the design information the following week"
Professionalpeerof: Engineer A
"notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review"
[facts] "the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities t..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer B
  • attributes: {'client_instruction': 'Franchiser specifically told Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A his relationship with the franchiser'}
  • relationships: {'type': 'hasClient', 'target': 'Franchiser', 'quote': 'retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US'}; {'type': 'reviewsWorkOf', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'Engineer B reviews the design information the following week'}; {'type': 'professionalPeerOf', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US; Engineer B reviews the design information the following week; notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • roleClass content: Engineer Role
  • roleCategory content: provider_client
  • roleKind content: professional
  • specialty content: Review of engineering design work
  • caseInvolvement content: Retained by the franchiser, before Engineer A's contract expires, to provide immediate review of pending design concerns. Instructed not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A, but after the review notifies Engineer A of the relationship and the preliminary results of his review.
  • confidence assessment: 0.92
Engineer A Design Engineer
Design Engineer Role
Linked
Design Engineer Role
C126
Text References:
"Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States"
"Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires"
Confidence: 0.95
Actor: Engineer A
Role Class: Design Engineer Role
Role Category: provider_client
Role Kind: professional
Specialty: Engineering design services for franchise retail facilities
Experience Level: Several years serving the franchiser
Employer: Engineer A's firm
Case Involvement: Original design engineer for the franchiser's chain of stores whose contract the franchiser declines to renew, and whose pending design work is reviewed by Engineer B before the contract expires.
Contract status: Contract not renewed; agreement with franchiser expires several weeks after Engineer B's review
Hasclient: Franchiser
"Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States"
Workreviewedby: Engineer B
"Engineer B reviews the design information the following week"
[facts] "Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer A
  • attributes: {'contract_status': "Contract not renewed; agreement with franchiser expires several weeks after Engineer B's review"}
  • relationships: {'type': 'hasClient', 'target': 'Franchiser', 'quote': 'Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States'}; {'type': 'workReviewedBy', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer B reviews the design information the following week'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States; Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires
  • roleClass content: Design Engineer Role
  • roleCategory content: provider_client
  • roleKind content: professional
  • specialty content: Engineering design services for franchise retail facilities
  • experienceLevel content: Several years serving the franchiser
  • employer content: Engineer A's firm
  • caseInvolvement content: Original design engineer for the franchiser's chain of stores whose contract the franchiser declines to renew, and whose pending design work is reviewed by Engineer B before the contract expires.
  • confidence assessment: 0.95
Engineer B Design Engineer
Design Engineer Role
Linked
Design Engineer Role
C126
Text References:
"the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer"
Confidence: 0.9
Actor: Engineer B
Role Class: Design Engineer Role
Role Category: provider_client
Role Kind: professional
Specialty: Engineering design services for franchise facilities
Case Involvement: Retained as the franchiser's design engineer after Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires, succeeding Engineer A in the design role.
Hasclient: Franchiser
"the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer"
[facts] "Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer B
  • relationships: {'type': 'hasClient', 'target': 'Franchiser', 'quote': 'the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer
  • roleClass content: Design Engineer Role
  • roleCategory content: provider_client
  • roleKind content: professional
  • specialty content: Engineering design services for franchise facilities
  • caseInvolvement content: Retained as the franchiser's design engineer after Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires, succeeding Engineer A in the design role.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Franchiser Client
Client Role
Linked
Client Role
C126
Text References:
"Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States"
"the franchiser decides to terminate its relationship with Engineer A and provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm"
"Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser"
Confidence: 0.93
Actor: Franchiser
Role Class: Client Role
Role Kind: participant
Additional Relationships:
  • {'type': 'retains', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States'}
  • {'type': 'retains', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US'}
  • {'type': 'gives notice of non-renewal to', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': "provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm"}
  • {'type': 'instructs nondisclosure by', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': "franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser"}
Case Involvement: Client that retained Engineer A for design services, gave notice of intent not to renew Engineer A's contract, retained Engineer B to review pending design concerns while instructing him not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A, and later retained Engineer B as its design engineer.
Business type: Major franchiser operating a chain of stores throughout the United States
[facts] "Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Franchiser
  • attributes: {'business_type': 'Major franchiser operating a chain of stores throughout the United States'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States; the franchiser decides to terminate its relationship with Engineer A and provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm; Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser
  • roleClass content: Client Role
  • roleKind content: participant
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'retains', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States'}; {'type': 'retains', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US'}; {'type': 'gives notice of non-renewal to', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': "provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm"}; {'type': 'instructs nondisclosure by', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': "franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser"}
  • caseInvolvement content: Client that retained Engineer A for design services, gave notice of intent not to renew Engineer A's contract, retained Engineer B to review pending design concerns while instructing him not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A, and later retained Engineer B as its design engineer.
  • confidence assessment: 0.93

S States

States Classes
6
Pending Contract Expiration State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Temporal State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A temporal condition in which a client has given a professional notice of its intent not to renew the engagement contract while the contract remains in force, so the professional is in a wind-down window between the non-renewal notice and the contract expiration during which duties owed under the engagement still hold.
Inherited from TemporalState · note
A condition defined by phase or timing: a pre- or post-termination phase, a before- or after-notification window, a deadline window. As a content kind it is the temporal standing of the situation. Its deontic relevance is that it bounds when a time-relative obligation holds: the phase is an Event Calculus fluent, initiated and terminated by events and inertial or non-inertial in the sense of Berreby et al. (2017); reading the bounded duty off the fluent span is this design's own move.
Properties
Text References:
"provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm"
"In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B"
Confidence: 0.88
State Category: temporal
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Client provides notice of intent not to renew the professional's contract while the contract is still in force
Termination Conditions: The engagement contract expires
Principle Transformation: During the wind-down window the professional relationship with the incumbent engineer still holds, so dealings with a successor engineer occur while duties to the incumbent engagement remain in force.
[facts] "After several years, the franchiser decides to terminate its relationship with Engineer A and provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm; In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B
  • stateCategory content: temporal
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: During the wind-down window the professional relationship with the incumbent engineer still holds, so dealings with a successor engineer occur while duties to the incumbent engagement remain in force.
  • confidence assessment: 0.88
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Client provides notice of intent not to renew the professional's contract while the contract is still in force
  • terminationConditions: The engagement contract expires
changed
ClientDirectiveState
rdfs:subClassOf States
Linked
Client Directive State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A condition in which the client has specifically instructed the professional in how to perform contracted services, here the franchiser specifically telling Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A the relationship between Engineer B and the franchiser prior to the review.
Inherited from ClientDirectiveState · note
A condition in which the client has specifically instructed the professional in how to perform contracted services, so the professional's conduct follows a client directive, here City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, instructing Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way Firm DBA completed them.
Properties
Text References:
"Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Confidence: 0.93
State Category: disclosure
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Client issues a specific nondisclosure instruction to the retained professional
Termination Conditions: The professional discloses the relationship, ending the covert condition the directive sought to maintain
Principle Transformation: The client's nondisclosure instruction places the faithful-agent duty to the client in tension with candor toward the engineer whose work is under review.
[facts] "Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser.
  • stateCategory content: disclosure
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The client's nondisclosure instruction places the faithful-agent duty to the client in tension with candor toward the engineer whose work is under review.
  • confidence assessment: 0.93
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Client issues a specific nondisclosure instruction to the retained professional
  • terminationConditions: The professional discloses the relationship, ending the covert condition the directive sought to maintain
changed
Conflict Of Interest State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Linked
Conflict Of Interest State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A condition in which an agent holds competing interests or loyalties, or competing role-derived duties, that cannot all be fully served, here Engineer B retained to review Engineer A's pending design work under a client instruction of nondisclosure while Engineer A remains under contract with the same client, setting B's duty to the retaining client against candid dealing with the incumbent engineer.
Inherited from ConflictOfInterestState · note
A condition in which an agent holds competing interests or loyalties, or competing role-derived duties, that cannot all be fully served and that bias or constrain the exercise of professional judgment. As a content kind it is the standing tension among interests, covering both conflict of interest and competing duties. Its deontic relevance is that it renders the affected obligations defeasible against one another and grounds the competesWith, prevailsOver, and defeasibleUnder edge family.
Properties
Text References:
"retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US"
"Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Confidence: 0.9
State Category: conflict_of_interest
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Reviewing engineer is retained to review another engineer's work while instructed to conceal the retention from that engineer
Termination Conditions: Reviewing engineer notifies the engineer under review of the relationship
Principle Transformation: The competing pulls of client loyalty and fair dealing with a fellow engineer make B's covert review posture the condition against which his disclosure decision is evaluated.
[facts] "In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pendin..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US; Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser.
  • stateCategory content: conflict_of_interest
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The competing pulls of client loyalty and fair dealing with a fellow engineer make B's covert review posture the condition against which his disclosure decision is evaluated.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Reviewing engineer is retained to review another engineer's work while instructed to conceal the retention from that engineer
  • terminationConditions: Reviewing engineer notifies the engineer under review of the relationship
changed
Peer Review Awareness State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Linked
Peer Review Awareness State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
An epistemic condition in which the engineer whose work is being reviewed knows that another engineer has been retained to review it, here Engineer A knowing of Engineer B's relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of B's review after B's notification.
Inherited from PeerReviewAwarenessState · note
An epistemic condition in which the engineer whose work is being reviewed knows that another engineer has been retained to inspect the facility and that the resulting evaluation will necessarily entail a review of the original designs, so the knowledge condition of Section 12(a) is satisfied. Here Engineer A knew of Engineer B's retention and of the review it would entail.
Properties
Text References:
"notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review"
Confidence: 0.9
State Category: epistemic
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Reviewing engineer notifies the engineer under review of the retention and the review
Principle Transformation: Once the engineer under review knows of the review, the concealment condition is dissolved and dealings among the parties proceed on disclosed footing.
[facts] "Nevertheless, Engineer B reviews the design information the following week and following his review, notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • stateCategory content: epistemic
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: Once the engineer under review knows of the review, the concealment condition is dissolved and dealings among the parties proceed on disclosed footing.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Reviewing engineer notifies the engineer under review of the retention and the review
Pending Design Concern State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Epistemic State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
An epistemic condition in which design concerns remain unresolved and pending in connection with a professional's design work, so the client's uncertainty about the adequacy of the pending designs prompts an immediate independent review.
Inherited from EpistemicState · note
A condition of what an agent knows, believes, or is uncertain of with respect to facts material to a decision. As a content kind it captures the agent's knowledge state, the classical Aristotelian epistemic condition for responsibility: an agent is answerable for conduct in proportion to what the agent knew or should have known; Sarmiento et al. (2022) name epistemic aspects fundamental for moving beyond causality to responsibility. Its deontic relevance is that knowledge conditions the obligations governing informed decision and decision-under-uncertainty.
Properties
Text References:
"retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US"
Confidence: 0.78
State Category: epistemic
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Design concerns arise on pending design work and remain unresolved
Termination Conditions: Independent review resolves or characterizes the design concerns
Principle Transformation: The unresolved design concerns are the stated ground for retaining a second engineer for immediate review while the first engineer's contract still runs.
[facts] "the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities t..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US
  • stateCategory content: epistemic
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The unresolved design concerns are the stated ground for retaining a second engineer for immediate review while the first engineer's contract still runs.
  • confidence assessment: 0.78
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Design concerns arise on pending design work and remain unresolved
  • terminationConditions: Independent review resolves or characterizes the design concerns
changed
Engagement Termination State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Engagement Termination State
C126
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A temporal condition in which a professional's contract for services has expired or been terminated by the client, so the professional is in a post-engagement phase, here Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser having expired with the franchiser then retaining Engineer B as its design engineer.
Inherited from EngagementTerminationState · note
A temporal condition in which a professional's contract for services has been terminated by the client, with services performed fully paid, so the professional is in a post-engagement phase while knowledge acquired during the engagement remains held.
Properties
Text References:
"Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer."
Confidence: 0.88
State Category: temporal
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: The professional's agreement with the client expires
Principle Transformation: Once the agreement expires, the incumbent relationship ends and the client's retention of the successor engineer proceeds outside any active engagement with the first engineer.
[facts] "Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer.
  • stateCategory content: temporal
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: Once the agreement expires, the incumbent relationship ends and the client's retention of the successor engineer proceeds outside any active engagement with the first engineer.
  • confidence assessment: 0.88
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: The professional's agreement with the client expires
States Individuals
6
changed
Engineer A Review Awareness
Peer Review Awareness State
Linked
Peer Review Awareness State
C126
Text References:
"notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review"
Confidence: 0.9
State Class: Peer Review Awareness State
Subject: Engineer A
Active Period: From Engineer B's notification following his review onward
Triggering Event: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Engineer B
  • Franchiser
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "Nevertheless, Engineer B reviews the design information the following week and following his review, notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • stateClass content: Peer Review Awareness State
  • subject content: Engineer A
  • activePeriod content: From Engineer B's notification following his review onward
  • triggeringEvent content: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Engineer B; Franchiser
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Review
Temporal State
C126
Text References:
"provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm"
"In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B"
Confidence: 0.88
State Class: Pending Contract Expiration State
Subject: Engineer A's engagement contract with the franchiser
Active Period: From the franchiser's notice of intent not to renew until the agreement expires several weeks after Engineer B's review
Triggering Event: The franchiser provides Engineer A notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm
Terminated By: Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Franchiser
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "After several years, the franchiser decides to terminate its relationship with Engineer A and provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm; In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B
  • stateClass content: Pending Contract Expiration State
  • subject content: Engineer A's engagement contract with the franchiser
  • activePeriod content: From the franchiser's notice of intent not to renew until the agreement expires several weeks after Engineer B's review
  • triggeringEvent content: The franchiser provides Engineer A notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Franchiser
  • confidence assessment: 0.88
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Franchiser Nondisclosure Directive
Client Directive State
Linked
Client Directive State
C126
Text References:
"Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Confidence: 0.93
State Class: Client Directive State
Subject: Engineer B
Active Period: From the franchiser's instruction prior to the review until Engineer B notifies Engineer A following his review
Triggering Event: The franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A the relationship between Engineer B and the franchiser
Terminated By: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer B
  • Engineer A
  • Franchiser
Urgency Level: high
[facts] "Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser.
  • stateClass content: Client Directive State
  • subject content: Engineer B
  • activePeriod content: From the franchiser's instruction prior to the review until Engineer B notifies Engineer A following his review
  • triggeringEvent content: The franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A the relationship between Engineer B and the franchiser
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • affectedParties content: Engineer B; Engineer A; Franchiser
  • confidence assessment: 0.93
  • urgencyLevel assessment: high
changed
Covert Review Engagement
Conflict Of Interest State
Linked
Conflict Of Interest State
C126
Text References:
"retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US"
"Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser."
Confidence: 0.9
State Class: Conflict Of Interest State
Subject: Engineer B
Active Period: From Engineer B's retention under the nondisclosure instruction until Engineer B notifies Engineer A following his review
Triggering Event: The franchiser retains Engineer B to review pending design concerns and instructs him not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A
Terminated By: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer B
  • Engineer A
  • Franchiser
Urgency Level: high
[facts] "In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pendin..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US; Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser.
  • stateClass content: Conflict Of Interest State
  • subject content: Engineer B
  • activePeriod content: From Engineer B's retention under the nondisclosure instruction until Engineer B notifies Engineer A following his review
  • triggeringEvent content: The franchiser retains Engineer B to review pending design concerns and instructs him not to disclose the relationship to Engineer A
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer B notifies Engineer A of his relationship with the franchiser and the preliminary results of his review
  • affectedParties content: Engineer B; Engineer A; Franchiser
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
  • urgencyLevel assessment: high
changed
Review
Epistemic State
C126
Text References:
"retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US"
Confidence: 0.78
State Class: Pending Design Concern State
Subject: The designs of several franchise facilities throughout the US prepared under Engineer A's engagement
Active Period: From the emergence of the pending design concerns until Engineer B completes his review the following week
Triggering Event: Design concerns arise and remain pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities
Terminated By: Engineer B reviews the design information the following week and reaches preliminary results
Affected Parties:
  • Franchiser
  • Engineer A
  • Engineer B
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities t..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US
  • stateClass content: Pending Design Concern State
  • subject content: The designs of several franchise facilities throughout the US prepared under Engineer A's engagement
  • activePeriod content: From the emergence of the pending design concerns until Engineer B completes his review the following week
  • triggeringEvent content: Design concerns arise and remain pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer B reviews the design information the following week and reaches preliminary results
  • affectedParties content: Franchiser; Engineer A; Engineer B
  • confidence assessment: 0.78
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Post-Expiration Engagement End
Engagement Termination State
Review
Engagement Termination State
C126
Text References:
"Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer."
Confidence: 0.88
State Class: Engagement Termination State
Subject: Engineer A's engagement with the franchiser
Active Period: From the expiration of Engineer A's agreement onward
Triggering Event: Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Franchiser
  • Engineer B
Urgency Level: low
[facts] "Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer.
  • stateClass content: Engagement Termination State
  • subject content: Engineer A's engagement with the franchiser
  • activePeriod content: From the expiration of Engineer A's agreement onward
  • triggeringEvent content: Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Franchiser; Engineer B
  • confidence assessment: 0.88
  • urgencyLevel assessment: low

Rs Resources

No new resources were extracted for this section.

The extraction did not find any resources to add. This typically means the case text doesn't contain relevant resources for this section, or extraction hasn't been run yet.

Pass 1: Contextual Framework - Facts
Review extracted entities, then continue to the next step
Continue to Discussion Review
Case texts: National Society of Professional Engineers, Board of Ethical Review.

NOTE: The NSPE Board of Ethical Review considers ethical cases involving either real or hypothetical matters submitted to it from NSPE members, other engineers, public officials, and members of the public. The BER reviews each case in the context of the NSPE Code of Ethics and earlier BER opinions. The facts contained in each case do not necessarily represent all of the pertinent facts submitted to or reviewed by the BER and shall not be considered a direct evaluation of any real matter that may have been submitted.

Each opinion is intended as guidance to individual practicing engineers, students, and the public. In regard to the question of application of the NSPE Code of Ethics to engineering organizations (e.g., corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships, government agencies, and university engineering departments), the specific business form or type should not negate nor detract from the conformance of individuals to the Code. The NSPE Code deals with professional services, which must be performed by real persons. Real persons in turn establish and implement policies within business structures.

This opinion is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. It may be reprinted without further permission, provided that this statement is included before or after the text of the case and appropriate attribution is provided to the National Society of Professional Engineers' Board of Ethical Review.

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3