Opinion
October 13, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.).
The award of interim attorney fees is a matter committed to the exercise of the sound discretion of Supreme Court (Guttman v Guttman, 129 A.D.2d 537, 538; Ahern v. Ahern, 94 A.D.2d 53, 58). Given the disparity in income and resources of the parties, Supreme Court appropriately awarded additional interim counsel fees in order to allow plaintiff to expeditiously litigate this action (Maharam v. Maharam, 177 A.D.2d 262, 264-265). The additional interim fees will be taken into account in determining the amount of the equitable distribution award (supra), at which time defendant will have ample opportunity to raise any objection as to necessity or amount of the sums expended (Davis v. Davis, 128 A.D.2d 470, 479-480). We repeat our observation that the proper remedy for asserted unfairness in making a pendente lite award is an expeditious trial (Cvern v. Cvern, 198 A.D.2d 197, 198; Marksohn v. Marksohn, 198 A.D.2d 70).
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.