California Family Code § 910: Community Property Liability for Debts of Either Spouse

Plain-Language Summary

California Family Code § 910 establishes that all community property (the assets and income a married couple acquires together during marriage) can be used to satisfy a debt incurred by either spouse. In other words, if one spouse has a debt — whether it was incurred before the marriage or during the marriage — creditors can generally reach the couple’s community property to collect on that debt.

This rule applies regardless of which spouse incurred the obligation and regardless of whose name is on the debt or judgment. Even if only one spouse signed for a loan or credit card, that debt is considered a community debt as long as it was incurred during the marriage (up until the point of separation). The non-debtor spouse’s separate property (property that belongs only to that spouse, such as assets acquired before marriage or after separation) is not liable for the other spouse’s personal debts. However, the couple’s joint assets and earnings (community assets) are at stake for debts either spouse owes.

Importantly, California law now clarifies that **“during marriage”** does not include the period after the spouses have separated. If spouses separate (with the intent to end the marriage), new debts one spouse incurs after that separation date will generally not be chargeable to the community. In 2016, the Legislature defined “date of separation” (Family Code § 70) to mean the point when a complete and final break in the marital relationship has occurred. Thus, a debt incurred by one spouse after the date of separation and before a divorce is finalized is treated as that spouse’s own separate debt – the community property won’t be automatically liable for it under Section 910.

Real-World Examples

Pre-Marriage Debt: Alice has a $10,000 credit card debt from before her marriage to Bob. After they marry, Alice’s creditor can go after Alice and Bob’s community property (for example, a joint savings account or other assets acquired during the marriage) to satisfy that debt. Even though Bob didn’t incur the debt, their community property is on the hook because the debt existed before or during the marriage.
During Marriage Debt in One Spouse’s Name: During the marriage, Bob takes out a loan solely in his name to buy new furniture. He later defaults on the loan. Under § 910, the lender can seek repayment from Bob and Alice’s community assets — it doesn’t matter that Alice never signed the loan agreement. The debt was incurred during the marriage, so both spouses’ community property interests are liable for it. (However, the creditor cannot touch Alice’s own separate property for this debt.)
Post-Separation Debt: Now assume Alice and Bob separate on January 1, 2025, with the intention of ending the marriage. If Alice opens a new credit card account in February 2025 (after the separation date) and accumulates debt, that obligation is considered Alice’s separate debt. Because it was incurred after the date of separation and before divorce, Bob will not be responsible for it under Family Code § 910. The credit card company could pursue Alice’s separate property and any assets she acquires going forward, but not the community property that existed before separation or Bob’s separate assets.

Published Case Law on § 910

California courts have addressed Family Code § 910 in several cases, clarifying how and when community property can be reached by creditors:

Oyakawa v. Gillett (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 628: A judgment creditor obtained a judgment against a husband alone and later tried to add the wife to the judgment to reach community assets (after the couple moved out of state). The Court of Appeal rejected this, holding that even though community property is liable for either spouse’s debt, a spouse who was not named in the lawsuit cannot be added to a judgment after-the-fact without having had an opportunity to defend herself. In short, creditors cannot simply tack on an uninvolved spouse to an existing judgment to access community property.
11601 Wilshire Associates v. Grebow (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 453: A landlord sued a husband for a lease guarantee and also named the wife (who had no involvement in the lease) as a defendant solely to make it easier to reach the couple’s community property. The Court of Appeal ruled that the wife could not be held personally liable just because she was married to the debtor. Family Code § 910 makes community assets available to satisfy the husband’s obligation, but it does not create a separate cause of action against the non-debtor spouse. In this case, the court affirmed that a creditor cannot sue or obtain a judgment against a spouse who did not incur the debt, purely as a “community representative.” The proper course for the creditor is to enforce the judgment against the community property of the debtor spouse, without dragging the other spouse into the litigation.
Sturm v. Moyer (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 299: This case dealt with a premarital agreement and its effect on creditors’ rights. The husband had a large unpaid judgment against him prior to marriage. He and his fiancée signed a prenuptial agreement stating that after marriage, each of their earnings and property would remain separate (preventing any community property from accumulating). The creditor later argued this agreement was a fraudulent attempt to evade debt under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, since normally the husband’s earnings during marriage would be community property reachable by creditors under § 910. The Court of Appeal agreed that the UVTA can apply to a premarital agreement in this way. It held that a premarital agreement characterizing all post-marriage income as separate property could be voided as to the creditor because it was executed with the intent to hinder or avoid the creditor’s ability to reach assets that would have become community property. In essence, you cannot use a private agreement to circumvent Family Code § 910’s principle that community earnings are liable for premarital debts.

Full Text of California Family Code § 910

(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, the community estate is liable for a debt incurred by either spouse before or during marriage, regardless of which spouse has the management and control of the property and regardless of whether one or both spouses are parties to the debt or to a judgment for the debt.

(b) “During marriage” for purposes of this section does not include the period after the date of separation, as defined in Family Code § 70, and before a judgment of dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws and their interpretations can change, and how the law applies to your specific situation may vary. For advice regarding your own circumstances, consult a qualified attorney.