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 171: Conflict Of Interest - Duty of Loyalty of Terminated Employed Engineer to Employer - Misleading Brochure

R Roles
3
Classes
4
Individuals
S States
4
Classes
4
Individuals
Rs Resources
0
Classes
0
Individuals

Extracted Ontology Entities

15 RDF entities extracted organized by concept type

R Roles

Roles Classes
3
changed
Engineer Role
rdfs:subClassOf Roles
Linked
Engineer Role
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A professional role involving engineering practice and responsibilities, governed by the engineering code of ethics. In this case both Engineer A and Engineer B practice engineering in a firm setting.
Inherited from EngineerRole · note
A professional role involving engineering practice and responsibilities. Occupational archetype head for all engineer specializations and extracted engineer-role leaves.
Properties
Text References:
"Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Confidence: 0.95
Role Kind: professional
Distinguishing Features: Practices engineering professionally and is governed by the profession's ethical code
Professional Scope: Professional engineering practice within a firm, including client service and employment relationships
Typical Qualifications: Engineering education and professional practice experience
Associated Virtues:
  • Integrity
  • Honesty
  • Loyalty
[facts] "Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A worked for Engineer B.; Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
  • roleKind content: professional
  • distinguishingFeatures content: Practices engineering professionally and is governed by the profession's ethical code
  • professionalScope content: Professional engineering practice within a firm, including client service and employment relationships
  • typicalQualifications content: Engineering education and professional practice experience
  • associatedVirtues content: Integrity; Honesty; Loyalty
  • confidence assessment: 0.95
changed
EmployerRole
rdfs:subClassOf Roles
Linked
Employer Role
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
The role borne by the employing party in the case. Engineer B employs Engineer A in an engineering firm, issues the termination notice, and distributes the firm brochure listing key employees.
Inherited from EmployerRole · note
The role borne by the employing organization as a participant in the case. The duty relationship is carried separately by :EmployerRelationshipRole. No IFC equivalent.
Properties
Text References:
"On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
"Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees"
Confidence: 0.9
Role Kind: participant
Distinguishing Features: Employs professional staff and controls their engagement and termination
[facts] "Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work.; Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees
  • roleKind content: participant
  • distinguishingFeatures content: Employs professional staff and controls their engagement and termination
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
changed
Client Role
rdfs:subClassOf Roles
Linked
Client Role
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
The role borne by parties that commission engineering work from a firm. In this case the clients of Engineer B were notified by Engineer A of his plan to start another engineering firm and were asked to consider him for future work.
Inherited from ClientRole · note
The role borne by the party that commissions the project work. This is the occupational archetype; the duty relationship is carried separately by :ProviderClientRole.
Properties
Text References:
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Confidence: 0.9
Role Kind: participant
Distinguishing Features: Commissions engineering work and may award future engagements
[facts] "Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
  • roleKind content: participant
  • distinguishingFeatures content: Commissions engineering work and may award future engagements
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Roles Individuals
4
Linked
Engineer Role
C171
Text References:
"Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
"Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Confidence: 0.95
Actor: Engineer A
Role Class: Engineer Role
Role Category: employer_relationship
Role Kind: professional
Employer: Engineer B
Additional Relationships: {'type': 'solicited future work from', 'target': 'Clients of Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.'}
Case Involvement: Employed engineer who, after receiving a termination notice from Engineer B due to lack of work, notified Engineer B's clients that he was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work, while continuing to work for Engineer B for several additional months.
Employment status: Notified of termination on November 15, 1982 because of lack of work; continued working several additional months
Listed in brochure: Listed as one of Engineer B's key employees in a previously printed brochure
Employedby: Engineer B
"Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
[facts] "Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer A
  • attributes: {'employment_status': 'Notified of termination on November 15, 1982 because of lack of work; continued working several additional months', 'listed_in_brochure': "Listed as one of Engineer B's key employees in a previously printed brochure"}
  • relationships: {'type': 'employedBy', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A worked for Engineer B.'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A worked for Engineer B.; Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.; Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.
  • roleClass content: Engineer Role
  • roleCategory content: employer_relationship
  • roleKind content: professional
  • employer content: Engineer B
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'solicited future work from', 'target': 'Clients of Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.'}
  • caseInvolvement content: Employed engineer who, after receiving a termination notice from Engineer B due to lack of work, notified Engineer B's clients that he was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work, while continuing to work for Engineer B for several additional months.
  • confidence assessment: 0.95
Linked
Engineer Role
C171
Text References:
"Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
"On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
Confidence: 0.9
Actor: Engineer B
Role Class: Engineer Role
Role Category: provider_client
Role Kind: professional
Case Involvement: Principal engineer of the firm employing Engineer A, who notified Engineer A of termination because of lack of work, and who distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of his key employees and continued to use it well after Engineer A was in fact terminated.
Firm principal: Runs an engineering firm with clients and key employees
Hasclient: Clients of Engineer B
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for fut..."
[facts] "Engineer A worked for Engineer B."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer B
  • attributes: {'firm_principal': 'Runs an engineering firm with clients and key employees'}
  • relationships: {'type': 'hasClient', 'target': 'Clients of Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A worked for Engineer B.; On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work.
  • roleClass content: Engineer Role
  • roleCategory content: provider_client
  • roleKind content: professional
  • caseInvolvement content: Principal engineer of the firm employing Engineer A, who notified Engineer A of termination because of lack of work, and who distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of his key employees and continued to use it well after Engineer A was in fact terminated.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Engineer B Employer
Employer Role
Linked
Employer Role
C171
Text References:
"On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
"Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well aft..."
Confidence: 0.9
Actor: Engineer B
Role Class: Employer Role
Role Kind: participant
Additional Relationships: {'type': 'employs', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'Engineer A worked for Engineer B.'}
Case Involvement: As employer, gave Engineer A a termination notice on November 15, 1982 because of lack of work, kept Engineer A on for several additional months, and continued distributing a brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee well after the termination took effect.
[facts] "On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Engineer B
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work.; Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A.
  • roleClass content: Employer Role
  • roleKind content: participant
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'employs', 'target': 'Engineer A', 'quote': 'Engineer A worked for Engineer B.'}
  • caseInvolvement content: As employer, gave Engineer A a termination notice on November 15, 1982 because of lack of work, kept Engineer A on for several additional months, and continued distributing a brochure listing Engineer A as a key employee well after the termination took effect.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Linked
Client Role
C171
Text References:
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Confidence: 0.85
Actor: Clients of Engineer B
Role Class: Client Role
Role Kind: participant
Additional Relationships: {'type': 'clientOf', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.'}
Case Involvement: Clients of Engineer B's firm who were notified by Engineer A that he was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
[facts] "Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Clients of Engineer B
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
  • roleClass content: Client Role
  • roleKind content: participant
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'clientOf', 'target': 'Engineer B', 'quote': 'Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.'}
  • caseInvolvement content: Clients of Engineer B's firm who were notified by Engineer A that he was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
  • confidence assessment: 0.85

S States

States Classes
4
changed
Employment Transition State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Employment Transition State
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A temporal condition in which a professional has been notified of termination or has announced departure from a position but continues to work in that position for a further period, so duties owed in the current role still hold while plans for the professional's next practice already exist. Here Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November 15, 1982 termination notice while planning to start another engineering firm.
Inherited from EmploymentTransitionState · note
A temporal condition in which a professional has announced departure from one position and accepted a new position, so the professional is in a transition phase between announcing the move and fully leaving the prior role, during which duties owed in the prior role still hold while ties to the new employer already exist.
Properties
Text References:
"On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
"Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Confidence: 0.88
State Category: temporal
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: An employer notifies a professional of termination while the professional continues to work for the employer
Termination Conditions: The employment is in fact terminated
Obligation Activation: Faithful service obligation to the current employer during the remaining employment period
Principle Transformation: The fidelity owed to an employer becomes a concrete duty of continued loyal service during the window between the termination notice and the actual termination.
[facts] "Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work.; Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.
  • stateCategory content: temporal
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The fidelity owed to an employer becomes a concrete duty of continued loyal service during the window between the termination notice and the actual termination.
  • confidence assessment: 0.88
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: An employer notifies a professional of termination while the professional continues to work for the employer
  • terminationConditions: The employment is in fact terminated
  • obligationActivation: Faithful service obligation to the current employer during the remaining employment period
changed
ConflictOfInterestState
rdfs:subClassOf States
Linked
Conflict Of Interest State
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A condition in which a professional holds competing interests or loyalties that cannot all be fully served, biasing or constraining the exercise of professional judgment. Here Engineer A, while still employed by Engineer B, solicited Engineer B's clients for future work for the new engineering firm Engineer A was planning to start, placing Engineer A's interest in the planned firm alongside the duties still owed to Engineer B.
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:
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
"Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Confidence: 0.75
State Category: conflict_of_interest
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: A professional still employed by a firm solicits that firm's clients for the professional's own planned practice
Termination Conditions: The employment relationship ends
Obligation Activation: Faithful service obligation to the current employer
Principle Transformation: The loyalty owed to the current employer becomes concretely applicable to how Engineer A approaches Engineer B's clients while still on Engineer B's payroll.
[facts] "Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work. Meanwhile, Engineer A continue..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.; Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.
  • stateCategory content: conflict_of_interest
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The loyalty owed to the current employer becomes concretely applicable to how Engineer A approaches Engineer B's clients while still on Engineer B's payroll.
  • confidence assessment: 0.75
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: A professional still employed by a firm solicits that firm's clients for the professional's own planned practice
  • terminationConditions: The employment relationship ends
  • obligationActivation: Faithful service obligation to the current employer
changed
SelectiveReportingState
rdfs:subClassOf States
New C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A disclosure condition in which a firm's promotional material continues to list a former employee as a current key employee after the employment has in fact ended, so the firm's public representation of its personnel no longer reflects the facts. Here Engineer B continued to use a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A.
Properties
Text References:
"Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well aft..."
Confidence: 0.9
State Category: disclosure
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: A listed employee's employment ends while the firm continues to circulate material naming that person as a current key employee
Termination Conditions: The firm withdraws or corrects the brochure listing the former employee
Obligation Activation: Obligation to represent the firm's personnel truthfully in promotional material
Principle Transformation: The general value of truthfulness in professional representations becomes a concrete requirement that the brochure's personnel listing reflect who is actually employed by the firm.
[facts] "During that period, Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A.
  • stateCategory content: disclosure
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The general value of truthfulness in professional representations becomes a concrete requirement that the brochure's personnel listing reflect who is actually employed by the firm.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: A listed employee's employment ends while the firm continues to circulate material naming that person as a current key employee
  • terminationConditions: The firm withdraws or corrects the brochure listing the former employee
  • obligationActivation: Obligation to represent the firm's personnel truthfully in promotional material
changed
Work Shortage State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Resource State
C171
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A resource condition in which a firm lacks sufficient work to retain an employee, so the firm's workload constrains its ability to continue an employment relationship. Here Engineer B's stated reason for terminating Engineer A was lack of work.
Inherited from ResourceState · note
A condition of availability or scarcity of the means to act: time, budget, personnel, safeguards, or access to information. As a content kind it is the standing of the means available, distinct from the Resource (Rs) component, which is a knowledge artifact. Its deontic relevance is that it conditions the feasibility of obligations; context determines dynamic priorities among duties (Almpani and Stefaneas 2022), and a means-constrained context reorders them accordingly.
Properties
Text References:
"Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work"
Confidence: 0.72
State Category: resource
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: A firm's available work declines below what is needed to sustain its staff
Termination Conditions: The firm's workload recovers
Principle Transformation: The firm's limited workload conditions the feasibility of continuing the employment relationship and supplies the stated reason for the termination.
[facts] "On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work
  • stateCategory content: resource
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The firm's limited workload conditions the feasibility of continuing the employment relationship and supplies the stated reason for the termination.
  • confidence assessment: 0.72
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: A firm's available work declines below what is needed to sustain its staff
  • terminationConditions: The firm's workload recovers
States Individuals
4
changed
Post Notice Continued Employment
Employment Transition State
Review
Employment Transition State
C171
Text References:
"Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Confidence: 0.9
State Class: Employment Transition State
Subject: Engineer A, still employed by Engineer B after receiving the termination notice
Active Period: From the November 15, 1982 termination notice until Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A several months later
Triggering Event: On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work
Terminated By: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Engineer B
  • Clients of Engineer B
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Meanwhile, Engineer A continued to work for Engineer B for several additional months after the November termination notice.
  • stateClass content: Employment Transition State
  • subject content: Engineer A, still employed by Engineer B after receiving the termination notice
  • activePeriod content: From the November 15, 1982 termination notice until Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A several months later
  • triggeringEvent content: On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Engineer B; Clients of Engineer B
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Client Solicitation While Employed
Conflict Of Interest State
Linked
Conflict Of Interest State
C171
Text References:
"Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work."
Confidence: 0.75
State Class: Conflict Of Interest State
Subject: Engineer A, holding an interest in a planned new engineering firm while continuing to work for Engineer B
Active Period: From Engineer A's notification of Engineer B's clients until Engineer A's employment with Engineer B actually ended
Triggering Event: Engineer A notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work
Terminated By: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A, ending the employment relationship
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Engineer B
  • Clients of Engineer B
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work. Meanwhile, Engineer A continue..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer A thereupon notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work.
  • stateClass content: Conflict Of Interest State
  • subject content: Engineer A, holding an interest in a planned new engineering firm while continuing to work for Engineer B
  • activePeriod content: From Engineer A's notification of Engineer B's clients until Engineer A's employment with Engineer B actually ended
  • triggeringEvent content: Engineer A notified clients of Engineer B that Engineer A was planning to start another engineering firm and would appreciate being considered for future work
  • terminatedBy content: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A, ending the employment relationship
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Engineer B; Clients of Engineer B
  • confidence assessment: 0.75
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Stale Brochure Personnel Listing
SelectiveReportingState
New C171
Text References:
"continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A"
Confidence: 0.92
State Class: Outdated Personnel Representation State
Subject: Engineer B's previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees
Active Period: From Engineer A's actual termination and continuing well after it, for as long as Engineer B kept using the brochure
Triggering Event: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A while continuing to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it
Terminated By: Not stated in the case, the condition would end when Engineer B stops using the brochure with Engineer A's name
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer A
  • Engineer B
  • Clients of Engineer B and recipients of the brochure
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "During that period, Engineer B distributed a previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees, and continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: continued to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it well after Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A
  • stateClass content: Outdated Personnel Representation State
  • subject content: Engineer B's previously printed brochure listing Engineer A as one of Engineer B's key employees
  • activePeriod content: From Engineer A's actual termination and continuing well after it, for as long as Engineer B kept using the brochure
  • triggeringEvent content: Engineer B did in fact terminate Engineer A while continuing to use the previously printed brochure with Engineer A's name in it
  • terminatedBy content: Not stated in the case, the condition would end when Engineer B stops using the brochure with Engineer A's name
  • affectedParties content: Engineer A; Engineer B; Clients of Engineer B and recipients of the brochure
  • confidence assessment: 0.92
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Lack Of Work At Firm B
Resource State
Review
Resource State
C171
Text References:
"Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work"
Confidence: 0.72
State Class: Work Shortage State
Subject: Engineer B's firm, lacking sufficient work to retain Engineer A
Active Period: Holding as of the November 15, 1982 termination notice
Triggering Event: Not stated in the case, the decline in the firm's work preceded the termination notice
Terminated By: Not stated in the case
Affected Parties:
  • Engineer B
  • Engineer A
Urgency Level: low
[facts] "On November 15, 1982 Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: Engineer B notified Engineer A that Engineer B was going to terminate Engineer A because of lack of work
  • stateClass content: Work Shortage State
  • subject content: Engineer B's firm, lacking sufficient work to retain Engineer A
  • activePeriod content: Holding as of the November 15, 1982 termination notice
  • triggeringEvent content: Not stated in the case, the decline in the firm's work preceded the termination notice
  • terminatedBy content: Not stated in the case
  • affectedParties content: Engineer B; Engineer A
  • confidence assessment: 0.72
  • 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