Forensic Accountant & Business Valuation Expert for South Dakota 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 South Dakota 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.

Divorce in South Dakota is heard in the Circuit Court. Federal matters are heard in the District of South Dakota. Mr. Friedman is regularly engaged in matters in states across the United States, as well as in international matters, and the firm accepts South Dakota 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 — which in a state with a small professional community can be difficult to achieve locally.
• Records-based work travels. Valuation and tracing 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.

The Three Things That Decide a South Dakota Case

The entire standard is two clauses, and title is not one of them

The statute says the court may make an equitable division of the property belonging to either or both, whether the title is in one name or the other, having regard for equity and the circumstances of the parties. That is the whole of it.

Two things follow immediately. First, there is no separate-property category and no exclusion by origin, so nothing sits outside the court’s reach because of how it was acquired or whose name it is in. Second, and more consequential in practice, there is no enumerated list of factors — no statutory prompt about contributions, homemaker services, earning capacity, dissipation or tax consequences of the kind most states supply.

The absence of a checklist is not the relief it sounds like. In states with a factor list, a weak evidentiary record can still be organised around the statute. Here, there is nothing to organise it around. An argument for an unequal division has to be built from the ground up out of what the documents actually show, and an argument resisting one is tested the same way.

Fault comes in through one narrow door: the acquisition of property

A separate section is precise about conduct. Fault shall not be taken into account in awarding property, except as it may be relevant to the acquisition of property during the marriage.

The exception is narrower than it first appears, and the wording repays attention. It is tied to acquisition — how property came to be owned — rather than to conduct generally or to spending. So the useful question is not whether someone behaved badly but whether their conduct bears on how an asset was obtained: who actually earned or contributed the funds behind it, whether it was acquired through a course of conduct one party was excluded from, and whether the acquisition records tell a different story from the one being told.

That reframes the evidence entirely. A narrative about the marriage will not reach the property decision. An acquisition history drawn from bank records, purchase documents and tax filings can.

Without a checklist, completeness and valuation carry the weight

Where the statute supplies no framework, two things decide most cases: whether everything is actually on the schedule, and whether the values on it can be supported.

Completeness is the first and most commonly lost battle. Interests that do not arrive on a statement — an interest in a family operation, deferred or contingent compensation, equipment and livestock held through an entity, receivables owed to a business, an interest in a trust or estate — are not concealed so much as unlisted, and nothing in this statute prompts anyone to look for them.

Valuation is the second. With no factor list to argue over, a disagreement about value is often the only disagreement left, which puts method under real scrutiny: how an operating business or agricultural operation was valued, what was normalised and why, how a minority interest was treated, and whether the figures reconcile to the underlying records rather than to a summary. An opinion that cannot be traced back to source documents has very little to stand on in a case with no statutory scaffolding around it.

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 South Dakota law.

Forensic Accounting and Litigation Support

Complete Asset and Interest Identification

Establishing what actually exists before anything is valued — entity interests, equipment and inventory held through a business, receivables, deferred and contingent compensation, and interests in trusts or estates — since nothing in the statute prompts a search for them.

Acquisition History Reconstruction

Documenting how each significant asset came to be owned and with whose funds, which is the one channel through which conduct can reach the property decision under South Dakota’s fault rule.

Business and Operation Valuation

Valuation of closely held businesses and agricultural operations, including the normalization questions that decide most of these cases: owner compensation, discretionary expenses, related-party transactions, equipment and inventory, and customer or buyer concentration.

Hidden Asset Tracing

Following money through business accounts, related entities and personal accounts to establish what exists and where it went — common in divorce 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 South Dakota, very often the central dispute, because the statute gives the parties little else to argue about.

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

Does South Dakota separate marital from non-marital property?

The statute does not create those categories. It allows an equitable division of property belonging to either or both parties, whatever the title, with regard for equity and the circumstances of the parties.

Does it matter whose name the property is in?

No. The statute says so expressly — the division may be made whether the title is in one party’s name or the other’s.

What factors does the court weigh?

The statute itself lists none. It gives one standard: equity and the circumstances of the parties. That places unusual weight on what the financial evidence actually establishes, since there is no statutory checklist to structure the argument around.

Does my spouse’s affair affect the property division?

Fault is not taken into account in awarding property, except where it may be relevant to the acquisition of property during the marriage. So conduct reaches the property decision only through how assets came to be acquired, not as a general matter.

What does the acquisition exception cover in practice?

It directs attention to how an asset was obtained and with whose resources, rather than to behaviour generally. Answering it means reconstructing the acquisition from bank records, purchase documents and tax filings.

Which court hears a divorce in South Dakota?

The Circuit Court.

Can a Florida-based expert work on a South Dakota 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?

Entity documents and financial statements for any business or operation, tax returns including all schedules, the general ledger in native form, bank and credit card statements, payroll records, and loan and equipment documentation. For an acquisition question, the purchase records for each significant asset together with the accounts the funds moved through. Full tax returns with every schedule are the item to insist on — entity interests, trust and estate income and equipment holdings frequently appear there and nowhere else on a first disclosure.

What credentials should a financial expert in a South Dakota 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 South Dakota 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.