CHAUCA v. CHAUCA

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

"Modifications of pendente lite maintenance and child support 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" ( Verderame v. Verderame, 247 A.D.2d 609; see Aliano v. Aliano, 285 A.D.2d 522). The husband did not demonstrate that the pendente lite award left him unable to meet his own financial obligations ( see Pezza v. Pezza, 300 A.D.2d 555; Grant v. Grant, 299 A.D.2d 521, 522; Aliano v. Aliano, supra). Any inequities perceived by the husband can best be remedied by a speedy trial ( see Verderame v. Verderame, supra; Weinberg v. Weinberg, 247 A.D.2d 535, 536; Shipman v. Shipman, 237 A.D.2d 426, 427; Pascale v. Pascale, 226 A.D.2d 439, 440).

The husband's remaining contention is without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.