“Except as expressly provided to the contrary, community property is liable for a debt incurred by either spouse during marriage, whether or not the other spouse was a party to the debt. [Fam. Code, § 910] Further, the community is liable regardless of which party has management and control of the community property. In addition to the liability of community property for debts incurred during marriage, a spouse’s separate property is liable for debts incurred by him or her during marriage, as well as a debt incurred for the “necessaries of life” of that person’s spouse whether they are living together or apart. [Fam. Code, § 914, subd. (a)]”
“In the case of a contract, a debt is incurred at the time a contract is made. [Fam. Code, § 903, subd. (a)] Thus, where a former spouse is sued for breach of contract following the date of separation, the community is liable for the damages. [In re Marriage of Feldner, 40 Cal. App. 4th 617, 47 Cal. Rptr. 2d 312 (4th Dist. 1995) (noting that a spouse who completes a contract following the date of the parties’ separation may be entitled to reimbursement for post-separation efforts)] The determination of the character of a debt, like that of the character of an asset, is a different issue than a spouse’s right to reimbursement or credit because of postseparation conduct. [In re Marriage of Feldner, 40 Cal. App. 4th 617, 47 Cal. Rptr. 2d 312 (4th Dist. 1995)]”
“The liability of community property is not limited to debts incurred for the benefit of the community, but extends to debts incurred by one spouse alone exclusively for his or her own personal benefit. [Lezine v. Security Pacific Financial, 14 Cal. 4th 56, 58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 76, 925 P.2d 1002 (1996)] Although a spouse may be required to reimburse the community for the misuse of community assets, the community estate remains liable to third party creditors for any debt incurred as a result of such misuse of assets. [Lezine v. Security Pacific Financial, 14 Cal. 4th 56, 58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 76, 925 P.2d 1002 (1996)] The husband was not obliged when the marriage was dissolved to reimburse the community for funds he used to care for his infirm mother; the husband’s statutory obligation to support his mother was a “debt” for which the community was liable. [In re Marriage of Leni, 144 Cal. App. 4th 1087, 50 Cal. Rptr. 3d 886 (3d Dist. 2006)]
“Following the division of property, the community property awarded to one spouse no longer is liable for marital debts that are assigned to the other spouse, with the exception that the award of community real property to one spouse that is subject to a lien remains liable for satisfaction of the lien; the lien remains enforceable to satisfy the underlying debt. [In re Marriage of Turkanis and Price, 213 Cal. App. 4th 332, 152 Cal. Rptr. 3d 498 (2d Dist. 2013)]”
[California Civil Practice Family Law Litigation [certain citations omitted]]
