Introduction
This case study covers one of the more serious ethics violations I’ve seen in recent years. “Engineer X” was disciplined by licensing boards in four different states for repeated violations—ranging from false filings to certifying work he didn’t supervise. What started as questionable judgment quickly escalated into license revocations and public sanctions.
It’s a sharp reminder that ethics violations don’t stay contained. One bad decision, left unaddressed, can follow you across state lines—and across your career.
Overview of Violations
Engineer X worked for a firm that wasn’t properly licensed in multiple states. Over several years, he sealed work he didn’t oversee, submitted false license renewal forms, and ignored basic regulatory requirements.
Any one of these violations would have drawn scrutiny. Combined—and repeated across several jurisdictions—they created a disciplinary record that led to license revocation in two states and formal sanctions in two others.
The key issue wasn’t just technical missteps. It was a pattern of disregard for the rules that govern how licensed engineers are expected to operate—especially around supervision, honesty, and cooperation with regulators.
How the Misconduct Unfolded Across States
The timeline below shows how Engineer X’s actions unfolded over several years—and how repeated violations across multiple states led to escalating consequences. What began as isolated lapses eventually triggered formal investigations, license revocations, and long-term career damage.
Table 1: Timeline of Ethical Violations and Disciplinary Actions
| Year | Action or Event | Jurisdiction |
| 2018–2021 | Practiced engineering in multiple states without firm or personal licensure | Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina |
| 2019–2021 | Falsely stated on license renewals that no work was performed in Louisiana | Louisiana |
| 2022 | Improperly certified architectural drawings; misused seal | North Carolina |
| 2023 | Kentucky board launched investigation for unauthorized practice and improper certifications | Kentucky |
| 2024 | Licenses revoked in Kentucky and Oregon; additional penalties issued in Louisiana and NC | KY, OR, LA, NC |
State-by-State Disciplinary Actions
Kentucky
- Key Violations:
- Certified work on two projects not prepared under his supervision.
- Enabled two unlicensed firms to practice.
- Operated a firm without a business entity permit.
- Outcome:
Engineer X stopped cooperating during the investigation, ignored formal complaints, and skipped hearings. The Board revoked his license by default judgment in July 2024.
Lesson: Failing to engage with the process only makes things worse. Ignoring a complaint won’t make it go away—it guarantees the worst outcome.
Louisiana
- Key Violations:
- Falsely stated on two renewal forms that he had not worked in the state.
- Practiced engineering on at least four projects without authorization between 2018–2021.
- Outcome:
Entered a Consent Order, paid $1,000 fine and costs, completed required ethics quizzes. Case was reported publicly and to NCEES.
Lesson: Dishonesty on a renewal form may seem like paperwork, but boards treat it as a violation of public trust.
North Carolina
- Key Violations:
- Certified architectural drawings without architectural license.
- Affixed seal to work not under responsible charge.
- Used a facsimile signature and omitted required firm info on sealed documents.
- Outcome:
Issued a public reprimand, fined $5,000, and required to complete an ethics course.
Lesson: Sloppy or improper use of seals, even on “minor” documents, is viewed as a serious ethics breach.
Oregon
- Key Violations:
- Failed to supervise certified plans.
- Failed to notify Oregon of prior discipline in other states.
- Failed to respond to inquiries.
- Outcome:
License was permanently revoked. The sanction was made public by the board.
Lesson: Boards expect transparency—especially when it comes to reporting past discipline. Failing to disclose prior violations is a violation itself.
A Comparative Look at Licensing Board Responses
The table below summarizes how each state responded to Engineer X’s violations. While the specific penalties varied, the enforcement themes were consistent—misrepresentation, lack of supervision, and failure to cooperate were all treated as serious breaches of professional conduct.
This side-by-side view highlights both the shared expectations across jurisdictions and the risks of letting issues go unresolved.
Table 2: Multi-State Disciplinary Summary of Engineer X
| State | Violation Type | Key Issues | Penalty | License Status |
| Kentucky | Unauthorized certification, aiding unlicensed practice | Certified work not under supervision; unlicensed firm activity | License revoked (default judgment) | Revoked (2024) |
| Louisiana | Misrepresentation on license renewals | Falsely claimed no work done in state on two renewal forms | $1,000 fine + ethics quiz | Active (conditional) |
| North Carolina | Improper certification and misuse of seal | Used facsimile seal; signed architectural drawings without license | $5,000 fine + required ethics course | Active with reprimand |
| Oregon | Failure to supervise and failure to disclose prior discipline | Did not inform board of other sanctions; failed to cooperate | License revoked | Revoked (2024) |
Understanding the Broader Impact of Each Violation
Each state’s actions in this case reveal more than just rule enforcement—they show how licensing boards view ethics as a foundation of engineering practice. These weren’t just technical or administrative failures; they were violations of trust, responsibility, and professional judgment.
Kentucky: When Procedural Violations Become Ethical Failures
At first glance, certifying work not under your supervision may seem like a process error. But in Kentucky, it was viewed as a serious ethics breach—especially when paired with operating through unlicensed firms and refusing to participate in the investigation. Ignoring the process turned a fixable issue into permanent license loss.
Louisiana: Misrepresentation is a Trust Violation, Not Just a Paper Error
Engineer X’s misrepresentation on license renewals was treated as a violation of professional integrity. It wasn’t about a missed checkbox—it was about breaking the trust that boards rely on to regulate the profession. The takeaway: even routine filings must be truthful.
North Carolina: Technical Misconduct with Ethical Consequences
Using a facsimile signature, certifying work outside your licensed discipline, and omitting required information may seem like minor missteps. But these actions created the appearance of compliance without accountability—something the Board treated as a serious ethics failure.
North Carolina’s $5,000 penalty and mandatory ethics training illustrate how even seemingly small violations of certification protocol are viewed as failures in professional judgment and public duty.
Oregon: Expanding the Web of Risk
Oregon didn’t cite new technical violations—its decision was based on nondisclosure of past discipline and lack of cooperation. That alone was enough to revoke Engineer X’s license. Failing to inform one board about sanctions from another shows a lack of integrity and undermines the licensing system.
Conclusion
This case shows how small ethical lapses—if repeated or ignored—can spiral into career-ending consequences. Engineer X’s actions weren’t isolated mistakes. They reflected a pattern of misrepresentation, lack of supervision, and failure to cooperate with licensing boards.
For any practicing engineer, the lessons are clear:
-
One violation can trigger scrutiny in multiple states.
-
Honesty and proper oversight are non-negotiable.
-
Responding to regulators—and doing so transparently—is essential.
For engineers committed to safeguarding the public and honoring the responsibilities that come with licensure, this case study is a stark reminder that integrity, transparency, and ongoing education are not just ideals—they are requirements.
Neal Harper