| Fact | Time Qualifier |
|---|---|
| 1. Principal Engineer B <is employed by> Engineering Firm B. | Pre-existing fact |
| 2. Engineer A <is employed by> State 1's Highway Department. | Pre-existing fact |
| 3. Engineering Firm B & State 1's Highway Department <provide engineering services on> Highway 1. | Pre-existing fact |
| 4. Engineer A <writes paper/article> Highway 1 By-Pass Report <about> Highway 1. | Occurs during 2, After the conclusion of 3 |
| 5. Highway 1 By-Pass Report <provides a comparsion of> Route A, Route B, & Route C. | Occurs as part of 4 |
| 6. Highway 1 By-Pass Report <provides a favorable recommendation of> Route B. | Occurs as part of 4 |
| 7. City Official X <resides next to> Route B. | Pre-existing fact |
| 8. City Official X <criticizes> Route B. | After the conclusion of 4 |
| 9. Principal Engineer B <writes paper/article> Public Letter <about> Highway 1. [Questioned Fact] | After the conclusion of 4 |
| 10. Public Letter <criticizes> Highway 1 By-Pass Report. | Occurs as part of 9 |
| 11. Public Letter <criticizes> Route B. [Questioned Fact] | Occurs as part of 9 |
| 12. Public Letter <proposes the solution> Route D. [Questioned Fact] | Occurs as part of 9 |
| 13. Principal Engineer B <publishes> Public Letter <in> Local Press. | After the conclusion of 9 |
| Questioned Fact(s): | Facts 9, 11, 12 |
| Questioned Actor or Actors: | Principal Engineer B |
| The Board's Conclusion: | Ethical |
| Code | Code Status | How Cited | Grouped With | Over rides | Why Relevant? | Why Violated, Not Violated, Changed, or Not Applicable? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2(b). | Not Violated | Explicitly Discussed | None | None | ^ Engineer performs action related to civic or community affairs [9, 10, 11, 12, 13] ^ | ^ Engineer's action is of constructive service in civic
affairs [Unstated assumption]
Engineer's action advances the safety, health, and well-being of their community [Unstated assumption] % Engineer, as qualified in the field of engineering involved, has a responsibility to make public comments on matters of engineering that affect the public % [1, 3, Inference based on facts] ^ |
| 4(a). | Not Violated | Explicitly Discussed | None | None | ^ Engineer issues a criticism on a matter connected with public policy [9, 10, 11, 13] ^ | ^ Engineer's statement is not inspired or paid for by private interests (Inference based on facts) ^ |
| 5. | Not Violated | Explicitly Discussed | None | None | ^ Engineer experesses an opinion on an engineering subject [9, 10, 11, 13] ^ | ^ Engineer's opinion is based on adequate knowledge [1,
3, Inference based on facts]
Engineer's opinion is not based on honest conviction [Unstated assumption] ^ |
| 5(a). | Not Violated | Explicitly Discussed | None | None | ^ Engineer publishes or assists in publishing an article [13] ^ | ^ Engineer insists on the use of facts in reference to an engineering project or engineer [1, 3, Inference based on facts] ^ |
| 12. | Not Violated | Explicitly Discussed | None | None | ^ Engineer makes comments about another engineer [9, 10, 11] ^ | ^ Engineer's comments are not an attempt to maliciously
injure the professional reputation, prospects, practice or employment of
other engineers [Inference based on facts]
Engineer's comments are an attempt to falsely injure the professional reputation, prospects, practice or employment of other engineers [Inference based on facts] ^ |
| Case | Citation Type | How Cited | Grouped with | Q # | Why Relevant? | Why Distinguished or Analogous? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 63-6 | Analogous Precedent | Explicitly Discussed | None | 1, 2 | ^ %Engineer criticizes the work of another engineer% [9, 10, 11] ^ | ^ %Engineer is entitled to a different opinion/conclusion than another engineer% [Hypo: "There may ... be honest differences of opinion among equally qualified engineers on the interpretation of the known physical facts."] ^ |