The Honorable Carol A. Greene

Riverside County Superior Court, Department 2

Biography

The Hon. Carol A. Greene is a judge for the Riverside County Superior Court in California. She was appointed to the bench by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2019. At the time, she filled the vacancy created by the retirement of the Hon. Sharon J. Waters (Ret.).

She is a registered Democrat.

Judge Greene received a bachelor’s degree from St. Ambrose University. She went on to earn a J.D. from the University of Iowa College of Law.

Prior to her judgeship, she served as a supervising deputy county counsel with the San Bernardino County Counsel’s Office for three years. Greene joined the County Counsel’s Office as a deputy county counsel in 1996 and held that position until being named supervisor in 2016.

Her legal career also includes practicing as an associate at the law firm of Thompson and Colegate LLP from 1989 to 1996.

While on the Superior Court, Judge Greene has held an assignment in the Civil Division.

Recent Rulings by Hon. Carol A. Greene

  • THE CITY OF BANNING & TERRA FIRMA ENTERPRISES, LLC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion for Order of Prejudgment Possession is GRANTED.

    ...

  • MACIAS VS. GARCIA

     |  Riverside County

    At issue are nos. 2-5, and 9-10, which is similar to form interrogatory no. 6.4. They ask for total amount billed (no. 2); amount insurer has paid to medical providers (no. 3); amount paid to medical providers (no. 4); amount of outstanding medical bills (no. 5); amount accepted by healthcare provider that...

  • MACIAS VS. GARCIA

     |  Riverside County

    At issue is no. 6.4 which requires the name, address, telephone number; type of consultation, examination or treatment provided; and the dates, and charges of any health care provider for any injuries suffered. Plaintiffs invoked CCP §2030.230. A responding party may invoke section 2030.230 when an: answer...

  • CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA) N.A. VS SYLK

     |  Riverside County

    Defendant provides no authority that the court may strike a judgment. CCP §436 applies to pleadings—not judgments. “Contentions are waived when a party fails to support them with reasoned argument and citations to authority.” (Moulton Niguel Water Dist. v. Colombo (2003) 111 Cal. App. 4th 1210, 1215.) “Pro...

  • LABARBER VS DIAMOND AUTO EXCHANGE INC

     |  Riverside County

    A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack, or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable (Blank vs. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) In evaluating a complaint under these standards, if there is any valid cause of action sta...

  • ALEXANDER VS GOODMAN JUNE

     |  Riverside County

    The Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED, however, the truth of matters asserted in such documents is not necessarily subject to judicial notice. Statute of Limitations and Delayed Discovery The parties do not dispute that the limitations period for the claims contained in the Complaint (interference wit...

  • LABARBER VS DIAMOND AUTO EXCHANGE INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Further Production is MOOT. With regard to RFP 1 and 2, Defendant contends in its Opposition that the responses to these RFP were supplemented on 11/5/20. As such, the Motion is moot. If Plaintiffs have issues with the supplemental responses and or document production, they need to fur...

  • VILLASENOR VS P.T.C.H INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Court declines to consider Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections because of the failure to comply with CRC, rule 3.1354. OVERRULE nos. 1, 2, 3 as to the Pietruszka Declaration; OVERRULE no. 1 as to Villasenor Declaration The Motion for Summary Judgment on causation is GRANTED.

    To establish proxima...

  • SAID VS GONZALEZ

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Strike Punitive Damages is SUSTAINED.

    ...

  • BAEZ VS TSAO

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel is DENIED. It appears that the Notice of Deposition was served in violation of CCP 2025.210(b). The Plaintiff did wait the 20 days to serve the Notice of Depositions.

    ...

  • MILLER VS BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS

     |  Riverside County

    Motion to Deposit Funds was unopposed and is GRANTED.

    ...

  • RODRIGUEZ VS LOS FREDOS MEXICAN FOOD

     |  Riverside County

    The Court has not received any opposition, the Motion to Compel is granted. Sanctions are awarded to the Plaintiff in the amount of $340.

    ...

  • GHALY MD VS RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTHPLAN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Bifurcate is GRANTED. The Court will hold a bench trial to determine if Plaintiff has evidence to overcome the Section 310 defense to his claims and Defendant will present its evidence. Closing briefs will be filed with the Court. Discovery will be limited to the Section 310 issues until the ...

  • DE LA ROSA VS PEREZ

     |  Riverside County

    Requests for Production Nos. 1, 9-12, 14, 15, 23, 25, 29, 40, 47, 48 and 52 Directed to Anjelie All of the RPDs, responses, arguments made by counsel in the separate statements, and analysis as to Anjelie are the same as those for Rudolfo, except that as to Anjelie there was one additional RPD - No. 48. Th...

  • DE LA ROSA VS PEREZ

     |  Riverside County

    Form Interrogatory Nos. 12.1-12.3, 15.1, 16.2-16.8 Directed to Rudolfo The party to whom interrogatories have been propounded is required to respond in writing under oath to each interrogatory by: (1) an answer containing the information sought to be discovered; (2) an exercise of the party’s option to pro...

  • TYE VS BOWEN

     |  Riverside County

    Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1008(a) a motion for reconsideration must be based on new or different facts or circumstances of law. “Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 gives the court no authority when deciding whether to grant a motion to reconsider to ‘reevaluate’ or ‘reanalyze’ facts and author...

  • AWAN VS. ALDI INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Responses to Request For Admissions is moot as the verifications have been provided. Defendant has demonstrated good cause for the delay in providing the verifications and as such, sanctions are denied.

    ...

  • TYE VS BOWEN

     |  Riverside County

    The Court granted dismissal of defendant Emerald Escrow as part of the ruling on the Demurrer, as such the Court no longer has jurisdiction to consider a Motion for Reconsideration.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Response to Production of Documents is DENIED.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Request for Production of Documents is DENIED.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Form Interrogatories is DENIED.

    ...

  • VALDEZ-PRADO VS BIG 5 CORP

     |  Riverside County

    Vacated, Notice of Settlement filed 10/29/2020.

    ...

  • MILLER VS BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS

     |  Riverside County

    The request for production of documents seek documents relating to: the financing of the formation of BST Family, BST Family’s operating agreement, the formation of BST Family, any payment ever made to BST Family’s managers, the meetings of BST Family managers, any loans received from BST Family a formatio...

  • GHALY MD VS RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTHPLAN

     |  Riverside County

    The Court finds that is in the interest of judicial economy to bifurcate this matter to hear the Section 310 issues before consideration of other potential issues. The Notion to Bifurcate is GRANTED.

    ...

  • See More Results

Recent Rulings by Hon. Carol A. Greene

  • THE CITY OF BANNING & TERRA FIRMA ENTERPRISES, LLC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion for Order of Prejudgment Possession is GRANTED.

    ...

  • MACIAS VS. GARCIA

     |  Riverside County

    At issue are nos. 2-5, and 9-10, which is similar to form interrogatory no. 6.4. They ask for total amount billed (no. 2); amount insurer has paid to medical providers (no. 3); amount paid to medical providers (no. 4); amount of outstanding medical bills (no. 5); amount accepted by healthcare provider that...

  • MACIAS VS. GARCIA

     |  Riverside County

    At issue is no. 6.4 which requires the name, address, telephone number; type of consultation, examination or treatment provided; and the dates, and charges of any health care provider for any injuries suffered. Plaintiffs invoked CCP §2030.230. A responding party may invoke section 2030.230 when an: answer...

  • CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA) N.A. VS SYLK

     |  Riverside County

    Defendant provides no authority that the court may strike a judgment. CCP §436 applies to pleadings—not judgments. “Contentions are waived when a party fails to support them with reasoned argument and citations to authority.” (Moulton Niguel Water Dist. v. Colombo (2003) 111 Cal. App. 4th 1210, 1215.) “Pro...

  • LABARBER VS DIAMOND AUTO EXCHANGE INC

     |  Riverside County

    A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack, or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable (Blank vs. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) In evaluating a complaint under these standards, if there is any valid cause of action sta...

  • ALEXANDER VS GOODMAN JUNE

     |  Riverside County

    The Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED, however, the truth of matters asserted in such documents is not necessarily subject to judicial notice. Statute of Limitations and Delayed Discovery The parties do not dispute that the limitations period for the claims contained in the Complaint (interference wit...

  • LABARBER VS DIAMOND AUTO EXCHANGE INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Further Production is MOOT. With regard to RFP 1 and 2, Defendant contends in its Opposition that the responses to these RFP were supplemented on 11/5/20. As such, the Motion is moot. If Plaintiffs have issues with the supplemental responses and or document production, they need to fur...

  • VILLASENOR VS P.T.C.H INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Court declines to consider Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections because of the failure to comply with CRC, rule 3.1354. OVERRULE nos. 1, 2, 3 as to the Pietruszka Declaration; OVERRULE no. 1 as to Villasenor Declaration The Motion for Summary Judgment on causation is GRANTED.

    To establish proxima...

  • SAID VS GONZALEZ

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Strike Punitive Damages is SUSTAINED.

    ...

  • BAEZ VS TSAO

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel is DENIED. It appears that the Notice of Deposition was served in violation of CCP 2025.210(b). The Plaintiff did wait the 20 days to serve the Notice of Depositions.

    ...

  • MILLER VS BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS

     |  Riverside County

    Motion to Deposit Funds was unopposed and is GRANTED.

    ...

  • RODRIGUEZ VS LOS FREDOS MEXICAN FOOD

     |  Riverside County

    The Court has not received any opposition, the Motion to Compel is granted. Sanctions are awarded to the Plaintiff in the amount of $340.

    ...

  • GHALY MD VS RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTHPLAN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Bifurcate is GRANTED. The Court will hold a bench trial to determine if Plaintiff has evidence to overcome the Section 310 defense to his claims and Defendant will present its evidence. Closing briefs will be filed with the Court. Discovery will be limited to the Section 310 issues until the ...

  • DE LA ROSA VS PEREZ

     |  Riverside County

    Requests for Production Nos. 1, 9-12, 14, 15, 23, 25, 29, 40, 47, 48 and 52 Directed to Anjelie All of the RPDs, responses, arguments made by counsel in the separate statements, and analysis as to Anjelie are the same as those for Rudolfo, except that as to Anjelie there was one additional RPD - No. 48. Th...

  • DE LA ROSA VS PEREZ

     |  Riverside County

    Form Interrogatory Nos. 12.1-12.3, 15.1, 16.2-16.8 Directed to Rudolfo The party to whom interrogatories have been propounded is required to respond in writing under oath to each interrogatory by: (1) an answer containing the information sought to be discovered; (2) an exercise of the party’s option to pro...

  • TYE VS BOWEN

     |  Riverside County

    Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1008(a) a motion for reconsideration must be based on new or different facts or circumstances of law. “Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 gives the court no authority when deciding whether to grant a motion to reconsider to ‘reevaluate’ or ‘reanalyze’ facts and author...

  • AWAN VS. ALDI INC

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Responses to Request For Admissions is moot as the verifications have been provided. Defendant has demonstrated good cause for the delay in providing the verifications and as such, sanctions are denied.

    ...

  • TYE VS BOWEN

     |  Riverside County

    The Court granted dismissal of defendant Emerald Escrow as part of the ruling on the Demurrer, as such the Court no longer has jurisdiction to consider a Motion for Reconsideration.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Response to Production of Documents is DENIED.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Request for Production of Documents is DENIED.

    ...

  • BOYD VS BROWN

     |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel was served by electronic mail and there is no evidence that there was any consent to accept service via electronic mail which is required pursuant to CCP 1010.6 and CRC 2.251. The Motion to Compel Form Interrogatories is DENIED.

    ...

  • VALDEZ-PRADO VS BIG 5 CORP

     |  Riverside County

    Vacated, Notice of Settlement filed 10/29/2020.

    ...

  • MILLER VS BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS

     |  Riverside County

    The request for production of documents seek documents relating to: the financing of the formation of BST Family, BST Family’s operating agreement, the formation of BST Family, any payment ever made to BST Family’s managers, the meetings of BST Family managers, any loans received from BST Family a formatio...

  • GHALY MD VS RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTHPLAN

     |  Riverside County

    The Court finds that is in the interest of judicial economy to bifurcate this matter to hear the Section 310 issues before consideration of other potential issues. The Notion to Bifurcate is GRANTED.

    ...

  • See More Results

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.