DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Domestic Relations Law § 236(B)(9)(b) provides that upon the application of a party in a matrimonial action, the court may modify any prior order or judgment as to maintenance upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances. The party seeking the modification has the burden of establishing such a change in circumstances (see Klapper v. Klapper, 204 A.D.2d 518, 519; Rosen v. Rosen, 260 A.D.2d 361). In determining whether there was a substantial change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a downward modification, the change is to be measured by a comparison between the payor's financial circumstances at the time of the motion for downward modification, and at the time of the divorce or, as the case may be, at the time that the order regarding the motion for downward modification is made (see Klapper v. Klapper, supra).
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's cross motion for a downward modification of maintenance. The defendant did not meet his burden of establishing a change in circumstances, because he failed to offer competent evidence of his alleged mental illness or his inability to work. Moreover, because the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion without a hearing (cf. Schnoor v. Schnoor, 189 A.D.2d 809).
FLORIO, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, McGINITY and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.