California Codes

Cal. Family Code § 920 (2026)

Reimbursement

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A right of reimbursement provided by this part is subject to the following provisions:

(a)The right arises regardless of which spouse applies the property to the satisfaction of the debt, regardless of whether the property is applied to the satisfaction of the debt voluntarily or involuntarily, and regardless of whether the debt to which the property is applied is satisfied in whole or in part. The right is subject to an express written waiver of the right by the spouse in whose favor the right arises.

(b)The measure of reimbursement is the value of the property or interest in property at the time the right arises.

(c)The right shall be exercised not later than the earlier of the following times:

(1)Within three years after the spouse in whose favor the right arises has actual knowledge of the application of the property to the satisfaction of the debt.

(2)In proceedings for division of community and quasi-community property pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 2500) or in proceedings upon the death of a spouse.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2023 · leading case: Fadel v. DCB United LLC (In re Fadel), 492 B.R. 1 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2013).
Fadel v. DCB United LLC (In re Fadel), 492 B.R. 1 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “Cal. Fam. Code § 920 does not give Mrs. Fadel an ownership interest in the Property.”
Collection Bureau of San Jose v. Rumsey, 6 P.3d 713 (Cal. 2000). · cites it 2× “Code, § 13554) of a deceased spouse, and the provisions of Family Code sections 914 and 920, making a married person liable for, and his or her separate property available to satisfy, such a debt, but also creating a right of reimbursement in the creditor-spouse, and further…”
Marriage of Terry, No. B321523 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 20, 2023). “(Fam. Code, § 920, subd. (c)(1).) Walmart lawsuit Kellie contends the trial court could not properly equalize the community interests because the Walmart lawsuit remained pending.”
McCay v. Turnboo, No. H037960 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 5, 2014). “2, subdivision (a), and Family Code section 920 all bar Turnboo’s claims.”
Mejia v. Reed, 97 Cal. App. 4th 277 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). “See also, Fam.Code, § 920. See generally, Recommendation Relating to Liability of Marital Property for Debt (Jan.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.