Opinion
June 12, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Gurahian, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
It is well settled that the proper remedy for any perceived inequities in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial, and that "modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court and then only under exigent circumstances such as when a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations or when justice otherwise requires it" (see, Gitter v. Gitter, 208 A.D.2d 895; Bagner v. Bagner, 207 A.D.2d 367; see also, Gianni v. Gianni, 172 A.D.2d 487). Contrary to the husband's contention, we find that the Supreme Court's pendente lite award represents a reasonable accommodation between the wife's needs and his financial ability to provide for those needs (see, Bernstein v. Bernstein, 213 A.D.2d 508; Byer v Byer, 199 A.D.2d 298). Accordingly, we decline to disturb the award. Copertino, J.P., Santucci, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.