Short answer. Yes. Article 61 of the Family Code authorizes the court to designate either spouse or a third person to administer community property during a legal separation case. If the court finds it appropriate, it may specifically exclude the spouse who caused the separation and appoint the other spouse or a neutral party instead.
What the law says
The court, in the absence of a written agreement between the spouses, shall designate either of them or a third person to administer the absolute community or conjugal partnership property.
Family Code, Article 61 — Living Apart and Property Administration During the Case. Read the full provision →
The court's broad discretion over property administration
Article 61 of the Family Code gives the court wide discretion once a legal separation petition is filed. Where the spouses cannot agree in writing on who manages the community property during the pending case, the court designates either of them or a third person as administrator. The word either signals that the court has genuine choice — it is not forced to defer to whoever the respondent spouse is, or to follow any automatic rule. The court chooses based on what protects the family's property interests during what may be a long-running proceeding.
Why the at-fault spouse may be excluded
The purpose of the pending-case administration is to preserve and protect conjugal assets until the case is resolved. A spouse who committed adultery, inflicted physical violence, or engaged in other conduct that gave rise to the legal separation ground has already demonstrated a willingness to breach marital obligations. That same conduct may indicate that giving them control over shared assets during the case is unwise. Courts are attentive to this: a spouse seeking administration authority who was the cause of the legal separation faces a meaningful argument — raised by the other spouse — that administration should be placed elsewhere.
The third-person option
Article 61 also allows the court to appoint a third person entirely if neither spouse is a suitable administrator — for example, when both parties are hostile and there is genuine risk of asset dissipation whoever is designated. A court-appointed third-person administrator is required to exercise the same powers and duties as those of a guardian under the Rules of Court: prudent management, no major dispositions without court approval, full accountability to the court for how the property is managed. This option exists precisely for high-conflict situations where a neutral hand is needed.
Raising this issue early in the proceedings
If you want the court to exclude your spouse from property administration during the case, raise it at the earliest procedural opportunity — ideally in the petition itself or in a motion filed at the outset. Present concrete evidence of conduct that makes your spouse an unsuitable administrator: attempts to transfer assets, unusual withdrawals, dissipation of community funds, or related behavior. The court's decision on administration during the case is not permanent — it can be revisited if circumstances change. A lawyer can advise you on the strongest way to frame this request given the facts of your situation.