Skip to content
  • Latest
2024 Success Stories
  • Call Today: 310.444.9060
  • Probate Services
    ▼
    • Trust & Will Disputes
    • Fiduciary Misconduct
    • Property Disputes
    • Elder Financial Abuse
    • Trust & Estate Administration
    • Conservatorship
    • Guardianship
    • Probate Appeals
  • Who We Help
    ▼
    • Executor / Administrator
    • Trustee
    • Beneficiary
    • Spouse
    • Power of Attorney
    • Conservator
    • Guardian
    • Creditor
  • Our Firm
    ▼
    • Attorneys
    • Staff
    • Careers
    • 10th Anniversary
  • Learn
    ▼
    • Blog
    • Case Studies
    • Newsletters
    • Testimonials
    • Whitepapers
  • Request a Consultation
  • Probate Services
    • Trust & Will Disputes
    • Fiduciary Misconduct
    • Property Disputes
    • Elder Financial Abuse
    • Trust & Estate Administration
    • Conservatorship
    • Guardianship
    • Probate Appeals
  • Who We Help
    • Executor / Administrator
    • Trustee
    • Beneficiary
    • Spouse
    • Power of Attorney
    • Conservator
    • Guardian
    • Creditor
  • Our Firm
    • Attorneys
    • Staff
    • Careers
    • 10th Anniversary
  • Learn
    • Blog
    • Case Studies
    • Newsletters
    • Testimonials
    • Whitepapers
  • Request a Consultation
  • Probate Services
    • Trust & Will Disputes
    • Fiduciary Misconduct
    • Property Disputes
    • Elder Financial Abuse
    • Trust & Estate Administration
    • Conservatorship
    • Guardianship
    • Probate Appeals
  • Who We Help
    • Executor / Administrator
    • Trustee
    • Beneficiary
    • Spouse
    • Power of Attorney
    • Conservator
    • Guardian
    • Creditor
  • Our Firm
    • Attorneys
    • Staff
    • Careers
    • 10th Anniversary
  • Learn
    • Blog
    • Case Studies
    • Newsletters
    • Testimonials
    • Whitepapers
  • Request a Consultation

Home » Blog » Breach of Fiduciary Duty Statute of Limitations: How Wiese Limits Claims Involving Separate Property

Last Updated: July 10, 2025

Breach of Fiduciary Duty Statute of Limitations: How Wiese Limits Claims Involving Separate Property

Discover how the In re Marriage of Wiese decision limits the breach of fiduciary duty statute of limitations in California for claims involving separate property even after death in this article by Keystone Law Group.

Search

When fiduciary duties are breached between spouses or domestic partners, California’s Family Code provides a statutory remedy. But what happens when those breaches involve separate property, and the alleged misconduct occurred over a long period of time?

The recent California Court of Appeal decision in In re Marriage of Wiese (2024) 102 Cal.App.5th 917 provides clarity on the scope and limitations of Family Code section 1101 in such cases. Specifically, the court held that the tolling provision in Family Code section 1101(d)(2) applies only to claims of community property, not separate property.

Wiese limits the timeframe for asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims based on separate property mismanagement and could have far-reaching implications for trust and probate litigation when claims are brought against or by a deceased spouse’s estate.

TELL US WHAT HAPPENED. WE’LL BE IN TOUCH SOON.

Wiese Overview: Separate Finances, Shared Complications

Jill and Grant Wiese were married for nearly 30 years before dissolving their marriage in 2016. Prior to marrying, they executed a premarital agreement (PMA) that kept their respective assets and earnings largely separate. The PMA required Grant, who entered the marriage with significant real estate wealth, to provide for the couple’s reasonable living expenses during the marriage.

Jill worked throughout the marriage as an independent agent for Grant’s real estate brokerage. Pursuant to a commission agreement between them, Jill was entitled to retain 100% of her commissions as separate property after deductions for business expenses and income taxes. However, during the dissolution proceedings, Jill alleged that Grant had wrongfully deducted excessive amounts from her commissions over the span of three decades. She claimed these actions diminished her separate property interests and constituted breaches of his fiduciary duties as a spouse.

Spouse’s Separate Property Claims Deemed Timely Under Family Code Section 1100

At trial, the Orange County Superior Court ruled in Jill’s favor, holding that her claims were timely under Family Code section 1101(d)(2), and awarded her $1.3 million. Both parties appealed.

No Tolling for Separate Property: Appellate Court Clarifies Scope of Family Code Section 1101

The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s ruling, finding that the tolling provision in Family Code section 1101(d)(2) applies only to claims involving community property, not separate property.

Family Code section 1101(d)(2) provides that a claim can be brought without regard to the breach of fiduciary duty statute of limitations in California if filed in conjunction with an action for dissolution of marriage or legal separation. Subdivision (d)(2) further clarifies that this exemption from the statute of limitations also applies to an action under this section in conjunction with the death of a spouse. 

However, the court held that this language does not extend to separate property claims. Claims concerning the mismanagement or impairment of a spouse’s separate property are not shielded by the tolling provision and remain subject to the four-year statute of limitations for breaches of fiduciary duty under Code of Civil Procedure section 343. In other words, the filing of a dissolution petition or the death of a spouse does not pause or reset the limitations clock for these types of claims.

Therefore, because Jill’s breach of fiduciary duty claims were based on the misappropriation of her separate property earnings — rather than any injury to community property — her claims were untimely. The appellate court reversed the $1.3 million award and held that the trial court had erred in applying Family Code section 1101(d)(2) to toll the statute of limitations.

Why the Breach of Fiduciary Duty Statute of Limitations Matters After a Spouse’s Death

While Wiese arose from a dissolution proceeding, its holding has ramifications in the context of trust and probate matters. Family Code section 1101 also allows claims to be brought against or by a deceased spouse’s estate for breach of fiduciary duty.

The ruling in Wiese sets a precedent that any claims against or by a decedent’s estate for fiduciary breaches involving separate property are similarly not subject to tolling. If fiduciary misconduct involving the separate property of a decedent or surviving spouse occurred long before death and outside the statutory four-year window, such claims may be time-barred, even if raised for the first time in a probate proceeding.

This limitation will be particularly relevant in probate disputes involving long-term marriages, premarital agreements, or blended families where the financial arrangements between spouses are complex, and the factual record may go back decades.

A careful statute of limitations analysis will need to be conducted when pursuing claims involving the handling of separate property assets — whether real estate, brokerage accounts, or business interests. Practitioners may also need to consider how Wiese aligns with other relevant case law, such as Yeh v. Li-Cheng Tai, which carved out a rare exception to the general one-year statute of limitations by allowing a surviving spouse additional time to bring a claim against a decedent’s estate.

Key Takeaways: What Spouses Should Know About the Breach of Fiduciary Duty Statute of Limitations

  • Fiduciary duties still exists, but with limits. Spouses owe fiduciary duties to each other even with marital agreements in place. However, enforcing those duties with respect to separate property is subject to a strict four-year statute of limitations under CCP section 343.
  • Tolling under Family Code section 1101 is limited. The tolling provision in Family Code section 1101(d)(2) applies only to community property claims. Separate property claims are not tolled by the filing of a dissolution petition or the occurrence of a spouse’s death.
  • Probate claims may be narrower than expected. Wiese provides a new lens through which to evaluate breach of fiduciary duty claims. Not all financial wrongs committed by a spouse are remediable after death, especially where separate property is involved.
  • Get legal help sooner rather than later. Wiese underscores the importance of timing when it comes to enforcing fiduciary duties involving separate property. While California law gives spouses strong legal protections, not all claims can be brought years after the fact — especially when they relate to separate property and arise after a spouse has died.

Still have questions about the breach of fiduciary duty statute of limitations in California?

The clock is ticking. If you suspect a breach of fiduciary duty involving separate property during marriage, it’s crucial to act quickly. The breach of fiduciary duty statute of limitations in California can time-bar your claim before you realize it.

The skilled probate attorneys at Keystone can help you stay on top of important deadlines, ensuring your claims remain enforceable. Contact our firm today to find out how we can help.

Contact Us Today
Share Post
PrevPreviousAsana Recognizes Keystone as Top 30 Innovator for 2025
Read NextHamilton v. Green Highlights Why Timing Matters in Trust ContestsNext
Related Articles
rare-noteworthy
A Rare But Noteworthy Exception to the General Rule That All Claims Against a Decedent Must be Brought Within One Year of Death
Read More
Elderly man with dementia needs help. Mature couple supports each other in the fight with amnesia and mental disorder. Memory loss concept
Rights to a Revocable Trust When the Settlor Is Incompetent – Probate Code 15800
Read More
can-a-bank-freeze-my-accounts
How to Handle Misappropriation of Trust Funds by the Trustee
Read More
image-grounds-for-contesting-a-will-or-trust-3
How to Change Trustees on Revocable Trusts vs. Irrevocable Trusts
Read More
thumb-what-voids-a-will
Guide for Removing a Trustee From a Trust
Read More
Illustration with hand wallet in flat style, finance vector
Consequences of Bad Faith Arguments for Trustee Removal
Read More
successor-trustee-reviewing-trust-paperwork
How to Become Administrator of an Estate
Read More
attorneys-discussing-trusts
How to Find Out if a Trust Exists
Read More
Success 2022 (1)
Recap of Keystone's 2022 Success Stories
Read More
Image of family discussing inheritance rights with lawyer. | Keystone Law
Case Study: Disinherited Spouse Settles for Minimal Sum
Read More
Subscribe to The Keystone Quarterly  

Stay up to date with the latest news in the exciting world of probate law through our quarterly newsletter, The Keystone Quarterly. 

Each issue provides insight into the latest probate developments, delves into some of Keystone’s more interesting cases, and gives important updates about our firm. The Keystone Quarterly is a must-read for attorneys and clients alike.

Linkedin Instagram Facebook
Contact
  • 11300 West Olympic Blvd.
    Suite 910
    Los Angeles, CA 90064
  • 310.444.9060
Contact Us
Linkedin Instagram Facebook
Company
  • Our Firm
  • Attorneys
  • Staff
  • Careers
  • 10th Anniversary
Probate Services
  • Trust & Will Disputes
  • Fiduciary Misconduct
  • Property Disputes
  • Elder Financial Abuse
  • Trust & Estate Administration
  • Conservatorship
  • Guardianship
  • Probate Appeals
Who We Help
  • Executor / Administrator
  • Trustee
  • Beneficiary
  • Spouse
  • Power of Attorney
  • Conservator
  • Guardian
  • Creditor
Learn
  • Blog
  • Case Studies
  • Newsletters
  • Testimonials
  • Whitepapers
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Sitemap
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Sitemap

©2025 Keystone Law Group, P.C. All rights reserved.

This website is for general information purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice. Connection to this website, and communication to this law firm via email or other electronic transmission do not constitute an attorney-client relationship with Keystone Law Group, P.C. unless a separate written agreement is signed by you and Keystone Law Group, P.C. as to the nature of any relationship and the amount to be charged for the intended legal services.

Manage Cookie Consent
We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show personalized ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}