Q1
A professional
engineer reviews structural drawings prepared by a junior engineer in the firm.
Due to time pressure, the senior engineer performs only a cursory review and
affixes their seal. Later, a structural failure occurs due to a design error in
those drawings.
What is the
most likely legal outcome?
A. The junior
engineer is solely liable because they prepared the drawings
B. The senior engineer is liable due to failure to meet standard of care
C. The firm is not liable because the work was delegated
D. No liability exists if the client approved the design
Explanation: The correct answer is B.
The senior engineer is liable due to failure to meet standard of care.
Under professional engineering law and ethics, when a professional engineer affixes their seal to drawings, they are taking professional responsibility for the work. A cursory or inadequate review—especially under time pressure—generally falls below the required standard of care expected of a reasonably competent engineer.
Key principles:
Delegation to junior staff is permitted, but the supervising engineer must provide adequate review and oversight.
Sealing documents implies the engineer has exercised professional judgment and verified the work appropriately.
A structural failure caused by a design error strongly suggests negligence if the review was insufficient.
Why the other options are incorrect:
A: The junior engineer may share responsibility, but the supervising/sealing engineer is not relieved of liability.
C: Firms can still be vicariously liable for employee negligence.
D: Client approval does not eliminate an engineer’s professional duty or liability for negligent design.
This question tests the concepts of:
professional responsibility,
standard of care,
negligence,
and the legal significance of an engineer’s seal.
