Key Takeaways

  • A business manager entrusted with control over a high-earning client's income and accounts owes fiduciary duties of loyalty, care, and full disclosure under California law.
  • Civil claims for misappropriation typically include breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, conversion, and a right to a full accounting, as illustrated in PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 384.
  • Misappropriation by a fiduciary can also constitute criminal embezzlement under Penal Code Section 506, providing a parallel avenue that can strengthen the civil case.
  • Non-fraud breach of fiduciary duty claims generally carry a four-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure Section 343; fraud-based claims generally carry a three-year period under Code of Civil Procedure Section 338(d), with a discovery rule.
  • Remedies can include a full accounting, compensatory damages, disgorgement of ill-gotten profits, and punitive damages where fraud, oppression, or malice is shown.

High-earning talent routinely hand over day-to-day control of their finances to a business manager — bill paying, tax planning, investment decisions, and general oversight of significant income. That arrangement depends entirely on trust, and unlike talent agents, business managers in California are not required to hold any professional license. When that trust is betrayed through self-dealing, concealment, or outright theft, California law provides several powerful civil claims to recover what was taken and hold the business manager accountable.

The Fiduciary Relationship Between Talent and a Business Manager

A business manager who is given control over a client's accounts, income, and financial decision-making occupies a position of trust and confidence. California law recognizes that this kind of relationship gives rise to fiduciary duties even absent a formal trust or agency license, including a duty of loyalty to act in the client's best interest, a duty of care in managing the client's finances, and a duty of full and fair disclosure regarding the client's own money. A business manager who places their own financial interest ahead of the client's, or who conceals material information about the client's accounts, breaches these duties regardless of whether the underlying conduct also amounts to a crime.

Common Warning Signs of Business Manager Misconduct

Misappropriation is rarely obvious at first. Warning signs include unexplained shortfalls between expected and actual account balances, resistance or delay in providing detailed accountings or underlying source documents such as bank and brokerage statements, unauthorized loans or transfers, comingling of client funds with the business manager's own operating accounts, and a pattern of vague, inconsistent, or shifting explanations when specific transactions are questioned.

Civil Claims Available Against a Business Manager

A client whose business manager has misappropriated funds typically has several overlapping claims. A breach of fiduciary duty claim addresses the manager's failure to act loyally and honestly with the client's finances. A fraud claim addresses intentional misrepresentations or concealment used to enable or hide the misappropriation. A conversion claim addresses the wrongful taking of the client's money itself. In PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 384, the Court of Appeal confirmed the important pleading rule that a conversion claim involving money requires an identifiable sum — a specific, traceable amount rather than a generalized claim of financial harm — which makes careful forensic accounting an important part of building these cases. A client may also have a claim for an accounting, compelling the business manager to produce a complete, itemized record of how the client's funds were handled.

The criminal parallel: Under Penal Code Section 506 (Current as of 2026. Laws are subject to legislative change.), a trustee, banker, agent, or any person entrusted with control over another person's property who fraudulently appropriates that property to an unauthorized use is guilty of embezzlement. While a civil claim proceeds independently of any criminal case, the existence of a parallel criminal violation — and any resulting restitution order — can meaningfully support the civil recovery effort.

Statute of Limitations

The applicable deadline depends on the specific claim. A breach of fiduciary duty claim that does not involve fraud or intentional concealment is generally subject to a four-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure Section 343. A fraud-based claim is generally subject to a shorter, three-year period under Code of Civil Procedure Section 338, subdivision (d), though this period does not begin to run until the client discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, the fraud — an important protection given how often business manager misconduct is deliberately concealed for years.

Remedies — Accounting, Disgorgement, and Punitive Damages

A successful claim can result in a court-ordered accounting requiring the business manager to fully disclose how client funds were handled, compensatory damages equal to the amount misappropriated or otherwise lost through the breach, and disgorgement of any profit the business manager obtained through self-dealing or unauthorized fees. Where the conduct involved fraud, oppression, or malice, punitive damages may also be available to punish the wrongdoing and deter similar conduct.

Steps to Document a Business Manager Claim

  1. Request a complete accounting in writing, including source documents such as bank statements, brokerage statements, and tax filings, not just summary reports prepared by the business manager.
  2. Engage a forensic accountant where discrepancies are suspected, since tracing specific, identifiable sums is often central to a conversion claim.
  3. Preserve all communications with the business manager regarding account balances, distributions, loans, and investment decisions.
  4. Identify any other professionals involved — accountants, attorneys, or financial advisors — who may have facilitated or failed to catch the misconduct.
  5. Consult an attorney before confronting the business manager directly, to avoid tipping off further concealment or destruction of records.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does my business manager owe me a fiduciary duty?

Generally yes, if they control your income, accounts, or financial decisions, giving rise to duties of loyalty, care, and full disclosure.

What claims are available if funds are missing?

Breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, conversion, and a right to an accounting are the most common, as illustrated in PCO, Inc. v. Christensen.

Is this also a crime?

It can be. Penal Code Section 506 criminalizes embezzlement by a trustee or agent entrusted with another's property.

How long do I have to sue?

Four years for non-fraud breach of fiduciary duty under CCP 343; three years for fraud under CCP 338(d), running from discovery of the fraud.

What can I recover?

A full accounting, compensatory damages, disgorgement of ill-gotten profits, and potentially punitive damages for fraud, oppression, or malice.

What are warning signs of misconduct?

Unexplained shortfalls, resistance to providing detailed accountings, unauthorized transfers, comingled funds, and shifting explanations for missing money.

Related Articles

Suspect Your Business Manager Has Mishandled Your Money?

Eagan Law represents talent and high-net-worth individuals throughout Los Angeles and California in claims against business managers, financial advisors, and other fiduciaries.

Request a Confidential Consultation

Attorney Advertising Disclaimer

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING: This blog is maintained by Todd Eagan of Eagan Law Corporation for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Eagan Law Corporation is located in Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California. Reviewing this blog or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This post provides general information about California fiduciary duty and fraud law and is not intended as legal advice for your specific situation.

Breach of fiduciary duty claims not involving fraud are generally subject to a four-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure Section 343, while fraud-based claims are generally subject to a three-year period under Code of Civil Procedure Section 338(d) (current as of 2026; laws are subject to legislative change). Consult an attorney promptly to protect your rights and preserve evidence.