SIEGEL VS BELLO MONTE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

1. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF SIEGEL VS BELLO MONTE DEFENDANT BELLA MONTE CVPS2406787 HOMEOWNERS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION'S ASSOCIATION PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE BY ALAN KURT SIEGEL Tentative Ruling: Granted.

Responding party to produce PMKs for remaining 23 areas of inquiry. Since the PMKs are employees of the Defendant HOA, they are not entitled to a witness fee. Deposition(s) to be completed within 20 days of this order becoming final.

Moving party to provide notice pursuant to CCP 1019.5.

Plaintiff Alan Kurt Siegel (“Siegel”) and his husband, Plaintiff David Allan Meister (“Meister,” collectively, “Plaintiffs”) allege that on December 21, 2023, Siegel was driving the Vespa on a roadway when he was ejected from the Vespa, causing him to sustain severe injuries. Plaintiffs allege that Siegel was ejected because the roadway constituted a dangerous condition due to its state of disrepair, specifically loose gravel and debris, large cracks, and a deteriorated and broken speed bump.

On October 23, 2024, Plaintiffs filed the Complaint against Defendants Bella Monte Homeowners Association (“HOA”), Southern California Edison Company (“SCE”), Southern California Gas Company (“SoCal Gas”), City of Palm Springs (“City”), County of Riverside (“County”), and State of California (“State,” collectively, “Defendants”), alleging causes of action for: (1) premises liability; (2) negligence; (3) dangerous condition of public property; and (4) loss of consortium. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants owned, leased, designed, occupied, operated, used, managed, maintained, inspected, secured, repaired, and controlled the Roadway.

On January 16, 2025, SCE filed a Cross-Complaint against Roes 1-20.

On March 10, 2025, HOA filed a Cross-Complaint against SCE, SoCal Gas, City, County, and State. However, each of the Cross-Defendants were dismissed after no ADR on July 7 and August 4, 2025.

Plaintiffs now move to compel HOA to produce a properly prepared Person Most Knowledgeable (“PMK”) as to the properly noticed 24 Topics and to produce the 53 demands for production of documents identified in their deposition notice. (C.C.P. §§ 2025.010, 2025.450.) On February 26, 2026, HOA produced Michael Schuknecht as its PMK on all topics, but his testimony revealed that he was unprepared to testify as to all of the topics as he conducted little to no investigation in advance. Counsel attempted to meet and confer on the record, but defense counsel refused, stating that HOA had already produced the person it designated as its PMK and would not produce another witness. Plaintiffs state they are entitled to this information and seek sanctions of $1,810 against HOA for having to file the motion.