Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as directed a conference on those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for an award of interim counsel fees and expert fees is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant.
The portion of the order directing a conference on those branches of the plaintiff wife's motion which were for an award of interim counsel fees and expert fees did not dispose of those branches of the motion and did not affect a substantial right, and therefore is not appealable as of right ( see CPLR 5701 [a] [2] [v]; Henning v Ritz, 44 AD3d 1005). Since leave to appeal therefrom has not been granted, we dismiss the appeal from so much of the order as directed a conference on those branches of the wife's motion which were for an award of interim counsel fees and expert fees.
Contrary to the wife's contention, modification of the pendente lite maintenance award is not warranted. "`Pendente lite awards should be an accommodation between the reasonable needs of the moving spouse and the financial ability of the other spouse . . . with due regard for the preseparation standard of living'" ( Levy v Levy, 72 AD3d 651, 652, quoting McGarrity v McGarrity, 49 AD3d 824, 825). "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" ( Malik v Malik, 66 AD3d 968, 968 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Avello v Avello, 72 AD3d 850; Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d 851; Maksoud v Maksoud, 71 AD3d 643). Consequently, any perceived inequities in pendente lite maintenance can best be remedied by a speedy trial, at which the parties' financial circumstances can be fully explored ( see Levy v Levy, 72 AD3d 651; Avello v Avello, 72 AD3d 850; Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d 851; Maksoud v Maksoud, 71 AD3d 643; Swickle v Swickle, 47 AD3d 704, 705). Here, the wife has not demonstrated the existence of exigent circumstances warranting a modification of the pendente lite maintenance award.