Opinion
April 26, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Mordue, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Boomer, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs and cross motion denied. Memorandum: In general, counsel fees pendente lite should be denied where the applicant possesses sufficient assets to pay counsel (see, Louise v Louise, 156 A.D.2d 937; Mullin v. Mullin, 144 A.D.2d 1020, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 604; Anonymous v. Anonymous, 120 A.D.2d 983, appeal dismissed 68 N.Y.2d 808; Drabek v. Drabek, 92 A.D.2d 722; Freid v. Freid, 23 A.D.2d 549). In awarding counsel fees, the court should consider the distribution of the marital property (see, Parsons v. Parsons, 101 A.D.2d 1017, 1018). Here, if plaintiff succeeds in setting aside or limiting the effect of the antenuptial agreement, she may receive a substantial award of marital property. Because plaintiff has a bank account of over $70,000 with which to pay her own attorney's fees and because, if she succeeds at trial, she may be entitled to a substantial distributive award, it is premature to award counsel fees at this time.