DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In this matrimonial action, the defendant former husband, inter alia, sought to modify the parties' judgment of divorce to eliminate his obligation to pay the plaintiff former wife maintenance and provide certain insurance coverage for her benefit. However, the defendant failed to establish a substantial change in circumstances warranting such a modification ( see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][9][b]; cf. Matter of Prisco v. Buxbaum, 275 A.D.2d 461; Sitler v. Sitler, 266 A.D.2d 202, Manno v. Manno, 224 A.D.2d 395). Further, he failed to show that such a modification was warranted pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 248 ( see Matter of Bliss v. Bliss, 66 N.Y.2d 382). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently denied such relief.
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.