Private investigator who used tracker on Reno mayor MUST reveal who hired him, court rules
Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2024 4:57 pm
The private investigator who utilized a GPS to monitor Reno Mayor Hillary Schieve and ex-Washoe County commissioner Vaughn Hartung last year is ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court to disclose his employer.
The command, issued in a succinct two-page order by the top judicial body of the state, saw all justices unanimously deny a plea to keep the client's identity under wraps.
The justices pronounced that the notion of client confidentiality doesn't equate to a trade secret, obligating David McNeely, the investigator, to identify the client as part of the legal discovery process in the ongoing lawsuit at the Washoe County Second Judicial District Court.
Rejecting the petition before them, the justices emphasized that Nevada law does not safeguard the confidentiality typically expected in private investigator-client dealings, thus the lower court is well within its rights to demand such disclosures.
After becoming aware of the covert tracking through a mechanic, Mayor Schieve began legal proceedings against McNeely in December 2022, alleging an invasion of her privacy.
McNeely's legal team contended to the supreme judicial authorities that unveiling their client would breach the traditional veil of secrecy intrinsic to the investigator-client rapport.
The claim that the client's identity is a "trade secret" and should be treated as such under state law was previously dismissed by Washoe District Judge David Hardy, a dismissal that McNeely's attorneys likened to the disclosure of a highly-guarded recipe's "secret sauce."
According to the lawsuit, Schieve had the tracking device surreptitiously placed on her vehicle for weeks, whereas Hartung had been tracked for months.
Schieve accused McNeely of encroaching on her property to plant the tracking device, which was eventually discovered by a mechanic during a service in the height of the election campaign, precisely when Schieve was headed towards a successful Mayor re-election bid in November.
While the Supreme Court's Monday mandate compels McNeely to name his client, it sets no specific timeline for this revelation.
A PDF copy of the ruling is available for download HERE.
The command, issued in a succinct two-page order by the top judicial body of the state, saw all justices unanimously deny a plea to keep the client's identity under wraps.
The justices pronounced that the notion of client confidentiality doesn't equate to a trade secret, obligating David McNeely, the investigator, to identify the client as part of the legal discovery process in the ongoing lawsuit at the Washoe County Second Judicial District Court.
Rejecting the petition before them, the justices emphasized that Nevada law does not safeguard the confidentiality typically expected in private investigator-client dealings, thus the lower court is well within its rights to demand such disclosures.
After becoming aware of the covert tracking through a mechanic, Mayor Schieve began legal proceedings against McNeely in December 2022, alleging an invasion of her privacy.
McNeely's legal team contended to the supreme judicial authorities that unveiling their client would breach the traditional veil of secrecy intrinsic to the investigator-client rapport.
The claim that the client's identity is a "trade secret" and should be treated as such under state law was previously dismissed by Washoe District Judge David Hardy, a dismissal that McNeely's attorneys likened to the disclosure of a highly-guarded recipe's "secret sauce."
According to the lawsuit, Schieve had the tracking device surreptitiously placed on her vehicle for weeks, whereas Hartung had been tracked for months.
Schieve accused McNeely of encroaching on her property to plant the tracking device, which was eventually discovered by a mechanic during a service in the height of the election campaign, precisely when Schieve was headed towards a successful Mayor re-election bid in November.
While the Supreme Court's Monday mandate compels McNeely to name his client, it sets no specific timeline for this revelation.
A PDF copy of the ruling is available for download HERE.