ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in awarding maintenance pendente lite and an attorney's fee (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][6]; Louis v. Gaines, 255 A.D.2d 561; Piali v. Piali, 247 A.D.2d 455; Ferdinand v. Ferdinand, 215 A.D.2d 350). The court correctly declined to impute income to the wife, since there was no evidence in the record which would permit the calculation of the wife's potential earnings (see, Hickland v. Hickland, 39 N.Y.2d 1, cert denied 429 U.S. 941; Petek v. Petek, 239 A.D.2d 327, 328). Contrary to the husband's contention, the Supreme Court set forth the factors it considered in making its award in sufficient detail. The proper remedy for any perceived inequities is a speedy trial, where the financial circumstances of the parties may be fully explored (see, Rigaglia v. Rigaglia, 277 A.D.2d 216; Piali v. Piali, supra).
KRAUSMAN, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.