signed the Stipulation. This document provided: “All other provisions [excepting Section F] of the Marital Settlement Agreement shall be incorporated and become a Judgment of this Court as a part of the final Judgment and Decree of Divorce.” (emphasis added). Therefore, Todd consented to South Dakota’s assumption of jurisdiction over all issues except those “issues regarding the minor child.” In contrast to child support, consent waiving jurisdiction over spousal support does not need to be provided to the issuing tribunal. See Cal. FamUode 4909; SDCL 25-9B-205. [¶ 25.] By incorporating the alimony provisions into the divorce decree, the alimony merged into and became a judgment of a South Dakota court, just as the parties expressly intended. See generally Beermann, 526 N.W.2d at 129 (<HOLDING>); Larsgaard v. Larsgaard, 298 N.W.2d 381, 383
recognizing a divorce decree which incorporates a property settlement agreement is a final and conclusive adjudication   holding that the trial court had authority to enforce a marital property settlement agreement that had not been incorporated into the parties final divorce decree holding that the jurisdiction of the divorce court with regard to support and maintenance is statutorily determined unless otherwise provided by agreement incorporated into the divorce decree holding that the trial judge had the power to incorporate a settlement agreement in a decree following the entry of a decree of divorce holding property settlement to be contractual obligation from date of final judgment of divorce