Updated August 25, 2026. Quick answer: In a long marriage with one earner, the tracing work that decides what the marital estate is often does not get done, because the spouse who needs it cannot fund it. Two state statutes and one federal rule point the other way: the court can order the other side to pay for the case you have to present, and the party who demands expert discovery pays for the expert’s time in responding to it.
Who the primary text says can be made to pay
| Where | What it says | Section |
|---|---|---|
| California | § 2030(a)(1) — the court shall ensure access to representation and may order one party to pay whatever is reasonably necessary for fees and for the cost of maintaining or defending the proceeding | Cal. Fam. Code § 2030 |
| California | § 2032(b) — the award must enable each party to have sufficient financial resources to present their case adequately | Cal. Fam. Code § 2032 |
| Florida | § 61.16(1) — the section is titled attorney’s fees, suit money, and costs, and reaches the cost of maintaining or defending the proceeding | Fla. Stat. § 61.16 |
| Federal rule | Rule 26(b)(4)(E) — the party seeking expert discovery pays the expert for the time spent responding to it | Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 |
Two states read at primary. Nothing is inferred about the other 48.
California’s is a duty, not a discretion
The section opens with shall. In a dissolution “the court shall ensure that each party has access to legal representation, including access early in the proceedings, to preserve each party’s rights by ordering, if necessary based on the income and needs assessments, one party, except a governmental entity, to pay to the other party, or to the other party’s attorney, whatever amount is reasonably necessary for attorney’s fees and for the cost of maintaining or defending the proceeding during the pendency of the proceeding.”
Two things in that sentence do work. Early in the proceedings, which is when a forensic engagement has to start if it is going to be useful. And the cost of maintaining or defending the proceeding, which is broader than the lawyer’s bill.
The companion section says what the award is for: the court “shall take into consideration the need for the award to enable each party, to the extent practical, to have sufficient financial resources to present the party’s case adequately”. Presenting the case adequately is the standard. If the case cannot be presented adequately without tracing, that is the argument, and it is the statute’s own argument.
Florida uses an older phrase that is broader than it looks
The section is headed attorney’s fees, suit money, and costs, and it says the court may “order a party to pay a reasonable amount for attorney’s fees, suit money, and the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding under this chapter, including enforcement and modification proceedings and appeals.”
Suit money is a term of art, and it is not a synonym for the lawyer’s fee – the sentence lists it separately from attorney’s fees and separately again from costs.
The federal rule that reverses who funds the expert’s time
Under the federal discovery rule, “Unless manifest injustice would result, the court must require that the party seeking discovery: (i) pay the expert a reasonable fee for time spent in responding to discovery under Rule 26(b)(4)(A) or (D);”
The party who wants to depose your expert pays your expert for the deposition time. Must, not may. Your divorce is not a federal case and this rule does not govern it – but many state discovery rules track it closely, so it is worth asking your lawyer whether yours does before assuming that every hour your expert spends is an hour you fund.
What this means before you decide you cannot afford it
The sequence that follows from these three sources is: ask early, ask on an access-and-need record, and ask for the cost of the proceeding rather than only for fees. None of that requires you to have the money first. What it requires is that the request be made at the point in the case where the statute says access matters, which is the beginning.
What this page does not settle
Two states and one federal rule, read at primary. Nothing is claimed about the other 48 states, and no forensic accountant or business valuation rate is published on this page.
No forensic accountant or business valuator rate is published here. We read no primary source publishing one, so this page prices nothing.
Two states are read. California and Florida are quoted; nothing is inferred about the other 48.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 governs federal civil practice. A state divorce is not a federal case; the rule is cited for the principle it states and because many state discovery rules track it, not as authority in your divorce.
Sources
- Cal. Fam. Code § 2030(a)(1) — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FAM§ionNum=2030
- Cal. Fam. Code § 2032(b) — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FAM§ionNum=2032
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4)(E) — https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_26
- Fla. Stat. § 61.16(1) — https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2024/61.16
Related: Mediation, Collaborative or Litigated · What a QDRO Costs · what tracing is for · how long these marriages ran.
General information drawn from the primary statutes, regulations and published federal plan documents named above, not legal, tax or financial advice. Court fees change, and the figures here are what each statute said on the date above; check the section before relying on it.