Forensic Accountant & Business Valuation Expert for Utah 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 Utah 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 Utah is heard in the District Court. Federal matters are heard in the District of Utah. Mr. Friedman is regularly engaged in matters in states across the United States, as well as in international matters, and the firm accepts Utah 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 earnings 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.

The Three Things That Decide a Utah Case

The statute grants the power and supplies no test

Section 81-4-406 provides that the court may include in the divorce decree any equitable orders relating to the parties, a child of the parties, and any property, debts, or obligations. That is the grant, in full. There is no enumerated factor list of the kind most states provide, and the code barely uses the phrase marital property at all — it appears in only one section, 81-4-502.

The working rules therefore come from Utah’s appellate courts rather than from the statute book, which is a point worth understanding before an expert report is scoped. What it means in practice is that a case is rarely won by pointing at a subsection. The evidence has to carry the argument on its own: what exists, what it is worth, where it came from and what each party contributed — documented well enough that a court can rely on it without a statutory framework to hang it on.

That places a premium on two unglamorous things. Completeness, because nothing in the statute prompts anyone to look for an interest that did not arrive on a disclosure. And traceability, because a figure a court cannot follow back to a source document has little to support it here.

Enhanced earning capacity can be answered in the property division itself

This is the one place the statute speaks directly about dividing property, and it is unusually well suited to financial analysis. Section 81-4-502 provides that:

• where a marriage of long duration dissolves on the threshold of a major change in the income of one of the parties due to the collective efforts of both parties, the court shall consider that change when dividing the marital property and in setting alimony; and
• where a party’s earning capacity has been greatly enhanced through the efforts of both parties during the marriage, the court may make a compensating adjustment in dividing the marital property and awarding alimony.

Both halves describe the same familiar situation and give it a remedy on the property side rather than only through support. A spouse supports the other through training or the building of a practice; the payoff arrives as the marriage ends; and the asset schedule does not reflect what was built because the value sits in a person’s future income rather than in anything ownable.

Quantifying it is ordinary forensic work. The earnings path actually followed, set against the one that existed before; the timing and scale of the change and how close it stands to the dissolution; what each party contributed in money, labour and foregone opportunity; and what a compensating adjustment would have to be to answer it. Presented as a grievance it is unanswerable; presented as a figure it is what the statute asks the court to consider.

Utah renumbered its entire family law in 2024, and older documents point at sections that are gone

Utah’s domestic relations statutes moved out of Title 30 and into a new Title 81, the Utah Domestic Relations Code, effective 1 September 2024, by a recodification enacted in the 2024 general session and continued in 2025. The provision on determining alimony and its property-division instructions was further amended in the 2026 general session.

The practical consequence is a citation problem rather than a legal one. A decree, a stipulation, an older expert report or a form that cites the former Title 30 sections is pointing at numbering that no longer exists, and anyone checking the reference against the current code will not find it. In a modification or enforcement matter, where the original decree is the starting document, that is worth resolving at the outset rather than discovering mid-analysis.

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 Utah law.

Forensic Accounting and Litigation Support

Enhanced Earning Capacity Quantification

Measuring the increase in a party’s earning capacity built during the marriage against the path that preceded it, together with what each party contributed in funds, labour and foregone opportunity — the analysis behind the compensating adjustment the statute permits in the property division.

Imminent Income Change Analysis

Establishing the scale and timing of a major income change arriving as a long marriage ends, and its relationship to the parties’ collective efforts, which the statute directs the court to consider when dividing property.

Complete Asset and Interest Identification

Establishing what actually exists before anything is valued — entity interests, deferred and contingent compensation, receivables and interests in trusts or estates — since the statute supplies no prompt to look for them.

Business Valuation Disputes

Valuation of closely held businesses and professional practices for divorce, 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 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 Utah, very often including whether an enhanced-earning-capacity claim was ever quantified or simply asserted.

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

What does Utah’s statute actually say about dividing property?

Very little. The decree may include any equitable orders relating to the parties, a child of the parties, and any property, debts or obligations. There is no enumerated list of factors in the statute, so the working rules come from Utah’s appellate decisions rather than from the code.

I supported my spouse while they built their career. Is there a remedy?

The statute addresses it directly. Where a party’s earning capacity has been greatly enhanced through the efforts of both parties during the marriage, the court may make a compensating adjustment in dividing the marital property as well as in awarding alimony.

My spouse’s income is about to jump, right as we divorce. Does that count?

Where a marriage of long duration dissolves on the threshold of a major change in the income of one party due to the collective efforts of both, the statute says the court shall consider that change when dividing the marital property and in determining alimony.

How is enhanced earning capacity actually measured?

By comparing the earnings path now in prospect with the one that existed before the marriage’s contribution, establishing the timing and scale of the change, and identifying what each party put in — money, labour and opportunities given up. It produces a figure rather than an impression.

Our decree cites Utah Code sections I cannot find. Why?

Utah moved its domestic relations statutes from Title 30 into a new Title 81 effective 1 September 2024. Older decrees, stipulations and reports cite the former numbering, which no longer exists in the current code. It is a renumbering issue and worth resolving at the start of a modification or enforcement matter.

Which court hears a divorce in Utah?

The District Court.

Can a Florida-based expert work on a Utah 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?

For an earning-capacity question, the full employment, qualification and earnings history of both parties, records of any training or practice-building supported during the marriage, and the documentation behind any imminent income change. For the asset side, tax returns with every schedule, entity documents, and account and loan records. For a business or practice, the general ledger in native form, bank and credit card statements and payroll records. The pre-marriage earnings history is the item most often missing and the one the whole enhanced-capacity analysis rests on.

What credentials should a financial expert in a Utah 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 Utah 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.