Opinion
2021–00406 Index No. 61571/18
10-19-2022
Stefanie DAVIDOFF, respondent, v. Jonathan DAVIDOFF, appellant.
Davidoff Law Firm, PLLC, New York, NY (Jonathan Marc Davidoff, sued herein as Jonathan Davidoff, pro se and Danielle Shayne Shapero of counsel), for appellant. Dimopoulos Bruggemann, P.C., Tuckahoe, NY (Gus Dimopoulos and Atty K. Bruggemann of counsel), for respondent.
Davidoff Law Firm, PLLC, New York, NY (Jonathan Marc Davidoff, sued herein as Jonathan Davidoff, pro se and Danielle Shayne Shapero of counsel), for appellant.
Dimopoulos Bruggemann, P.C., Tuckahoe, NY (Gus Dimopoulos and Atty K. Bruggemann of counsel), for respondent.
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from an order of Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nancy Quinn Koba, J.), dated January 4, 2021. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for an award of pendente lite child support to the extent of directing the defendant to pay pendente lite child support in the sum of $5,059 per month, retroactive pendente lite child support in the sum of $40,472 at a rate of $1,700 per month, and 100% of the children's add-on expenses.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The parties were married in 2008 and have two children. In July 2018, the plaintiff commenced this action for a divorce and ancillary relief. In an order dated January 4, 2021, the Supreme Court, inter alia, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for an award of pendente lite child support to the extent of directing the defendant to pay pendente lite child support in the sum of $5,059 per month, retroactive pendente lite child support in the sum of $40,472 at a rate of $1,700 per month, and 100% of the children's add-on expenses. The defendant appeals.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, modification of the pendente lite child support award is not warranted. "Modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court and then only under exigent circumstances, such as where a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations or justice otherwise requires" ( Barone v. Barone, 41 A.D.3d 623, 623–624, 839 N.Y.S.2d 161 ; see Capozzoli v. Capozzoli, 187 A.D.3d 834, 835, 130 N.Y.S.3d 722 ; Yerushalmi v. Yerushalmi, 136 A.D.3d 809, 811, 26 N.Y.S.3d 111 ). "Any perceived inequity in the award of pendente lite child support can best be remedied by a speedy trial, at which the parties’ financial circumstances can be fully explored" ( Hof v. Hof, 131 A.D.3d 579, 581, 16 N.Y.S.3d 569 ; see Maliah–Dupass v. Dupass, 140 A.D.3d 832, 833, 33 N.Y.S.3d 391 ). Here, the defendant failed to demonstrate the existence of any exigent circumstances warranting a modification of the pendente lite child support award made by the Supreme Court.
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., CHAMBERS, CHRISTOPHER and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.