Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
"Modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court and then only under exigent circumstances, such as when a party cannot meet his or her financial obligations" ( Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d 851, 852; see Swickle v Swickle, 47 AD3d 704). "[A]ny perceived inequities in pendente lite support and maintenance can best be remedied by a speedy trial, at which the parties' financial circumstances can be fully explored" ( Swickle v Swickle, 47 AD3d at 705; see Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d at 852). Here, the plaintiff failed to establish that the pendente lite award was inadequate, particularly in light of the fact that the defendant continues to pay the carrying charges on the parties' residences as well as, inter alia, the children's educational and medical expenses.
In light of our determination, we need not address the parties' remaining contentions.