Forensic Accountant & Business Valuation Expert for Montana Matters

Working With Out-of-State Counsel

Joey Friedman, CPA, P.A. is a litigation-focused forensic accounting and business valuation firm engaged by counsel in Montana matters. The firm is based in Florida and works nationwide, handling records-based analysis remotely and traveling for deposition and trial testimony as a matter requires. Mr. Friedman has testified in state, federal and foreign courts, for plaintiffs and defendants, in civil, criminal and marital proceedings. The firm does not prepare income tax returns and does not provide tax planning services.

Dissolution of marriage in Montana is heard in the District Court of the county. Federal matters are heard in the District of Montana. Mr. Friedman is regularly engaged in matters in states across the United States, as well as in international matters, and the firm accepts Montana engagements in state and federal proceedings alike.

Retaining a forensic accountant from outside the state is common in financial disputes, and in some matters it is preferred:

• Conflict distance. An out-of-state expert is less likely to have prior or ongoing relationships with the parties, their businesses, their banks or their other advisors.
• Records-based work travels. Valuation and contribution analysis are performed on documents and data. The location of the analyst does not change what the records show.
• Independence is visible. Where the parties move in the same local professional circles, distance from those circles is easier to explain to a finder of fact.

Why the Non-Owning Spouse Is the Subject of the Analysis

Everything is reachable, so the argument moves to contribution

Because the court apportions property belonging to either or both however and whenever acquired, there is no characterisation argument that removes an asset from consideration. Premarital ownership does not, and neither does inheritance. What the statute does instead, for exactly those categories, is direct attention to what the other spouse contributed.

That inverts where the evidence usually sits. In most states the owner is defending the asset’s origin; in Montana the useful record is what the non-owner did — contributions to the marriage, to the family unit, and specifically the nonmonetary contribution of a homemaker. An analysis built only around tracing the owner’s funds has prepared the wrong case.

Nonmonetary contribution is named, so it is measured rather than debated

The statute puts the homemaker’s nonmonetary contribution in the text. That settles whether it counts and leaves only the question of how much. It is quantified the same way any unpaid contribution is: what the work actually involved, over what period, what it displaced in the contributor’s own earnings, and what it would have cost to buy at market rates.

Where the asset in question is a business or a farm, the analysis usually has a second half as well — whether the non-owner’s work inside the enterprise, or the household support that freed the owner to run it, is traceable to the asset’s maintenance or growth. That connection is what turns a description of effort into a contribution the court can weigh against a specific asset.

Misconduct is excluded, so financial behaviour must be framed economically

The apportionment is made without regard to marital misconduct. Where money left the estate, the question is therefore what happened to it and what the effect on the estate was — measured against what the household or business normally did — rather than how anyone behaved. That framing is not a softening; it is what makes the evidence admissible to the question actually being asked.

The division itself is declared not to be a sale or transfer

The statute provides that a division of property under it is not a sale, exchange, transfer or disposition for the purposes it specifies. That is worth knowing exists, and it is squarely a matter for counsel and the client’s own tax adviser — this firm does not provide tax planning. What it means for the financial work is narrower and practical: valuations should be prepared and presented on a consistent basis, so that the figures a court relies on are not quietly mixing a pre-tax number for one asset with a post-tax number for another.

Personal versus enterprise goodwill

Where a business depends on one individual, part of its value may not transfer to a new owner. The firm calculates and separates the transferable value from the non-transferable value and documents the basis for each. This is a financial calculation, not a legal determination — how that split is treated is a matter for the court under Montana law.

Forensic Accounting and Litigation Support

Non-Owning Spouse Contribution Analysis

Building the record the Montana statute actually asks for — contributions to the marriage and the family unit, the nonmonetary contribution of a homemaker, and any connection between that contribution and the maintenance or growth of a specific premarital, gifted or inherited asset.

Full Apportionment Inventory

Inventorying and valuing all property belonging to either or both, since origin does not remove an asset from the court’s reach and an incomplete schedule understates what is being apportioned.

Business and Ranch or Farm Valuation

Valuation of closely held businesses and agricultural operations for dissolution, shareholder and partnership disputes and buyouts, including the normalization questions that decide most of these cases: owner compensation, discretionary expenses, related-party transactions and customer or commodity concentration.

Economic-Effect Analysis Where Money Left the Estate

Quantifying transfers and unusual expenditure against a documented baseline, framed as an effect on the estate rather than as conduct, which is the form the statute can use.

Hidden Asset Tracing

Following money through business accounts, related entities and personal accounts to establish what exists and where it went — common in dissolution and in partnership disputes where one side controlled the books.

Economic Damages and Lost Profits

Quantifying what was lost, on a method that survives cross-examination, and identifying where an opposing calculation departs from the records it claims to rest on.

Fraud and Embezzlement Investigations

Reconstruction of what happened from the underlying records — misappropriation, fictitious vendors, payroll schemes and diversion — documented so it can be presented to a court, a board or an insurer.

Rebuttal and Opposing-Expert Review

Review of an opposing expert’s report to identify method departures, unsupported assumptions and figures the underlying records do not support — in Montana, very often including whether the non-owning spouse’s contribution was quantified at all or merely described.

Deposition and Trial Testimony

Expert testimony in state, federal and foreign courts, in depositions, mediations, arbitrations including AAA, and jury and non-jury trials, for plaintiffs and defendants alike.

Frequently Asked Questions

I owned the ranch before we married. Is it out of reach in Montana?

No. The court apportions property belonging to either or both, however and whenever acquired. What the statute asks about such property is what your spouse contributed — including nonmonetary contribution as a homemaker.

So what evidence actually matters?

Usually evidence about the non-owning spouse: what they contributed to the marriage and the family unit, and whether that contribution connects to the maintenance or growth of the asset in question. An analysis that only traces the owner’s money has prepared the wrong case.

I did not work outside the home. Does that help or hurt me?

The nonmonetary contribution of a homemaker is named in the statute, so it counts. The question is what it amounted to, which is measured from what the work involved, what it displaced in your own earnings, and what replacing it would have cost.

Does my spouse’s behaviour during the marriage matter?

The apportionment is made without regard to marital misconduct. Where money left the estate, that is still addressed — as an economic effect on what there is to divide, measured against a baseline, rather than as conduct.

Is the property division taxed as a sale?

The statute states that a division under it is not a sale, exchange, transfer or disposition for the purposes it specifies. That is a question for counsel and your own tax adviser — this firm does not provide tax planning. What matters for the valuation work is that figures are presented on a consistent basis.

Which court hears a dissolution in Montana?

The District Court of the county.

Can a Florida-based expert work on a Montana case?

Yes, and it is common. The analysis is performed on documents and data, which does not depend on the analyst’s location, and the firm travels for deposition and trial testimony as a matter requires.

What records are needed to start?

A full inventory of property on both sides regardless of origin; records showing what the non-owning spouse contributed, including work inside a business or on a ranch and the household support that enabled the other’s work; and for a business or agricultural operation, tax returns and financial statements, the general ledger in native form, bank and credit card statements and payroll records. The contribution record is the one most often left until last here, and it is the one the statute points at.

What credentials should a financial expert in a Montana matter hold?

For matters that may reach a hearing, the relevant considerations are accounting credentials, experience with the specific analysis at issue, and a record of testifying. Mr. Friedman is a CPA accredited in Business Valuation (ABV) by the AICPA and a member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.

Discuss a Montana Matter

Joey Friedman is a CPA accredited in Business Valuation (ABV) by the AICPA, a member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, with more than 25 years in accounting and forensic practice and an expert witness practice serving attorneys and litigants nationwide since 2014. To discuss whether the firm is the right fit for a matter — including scope, timing and whether an out-of-state expert suits the case — call 954-282-9615 or use the contact form. The firm accepts engagements in other states as well — see states served for how the analysis differs elsewhere.