ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
"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). The husband did not demonstrate that the pendente lite award complained of left him unable to meet his own financial obligations (see, Schneider v. Schneider, 264 A.D.2d 728; Zeitlin v. Zeitlin, 209 A.D.2d 613).
Rather, the assessment represents an adequate accommodation between the reasonable needs of both parties (see, Salerno v. Salerno, 142 A.D.2d 670). Any inequities perceived by the husband can best be remedied by a speedy trial (see, Verderame v. Verderame, 247 A.D.2d 609; Weinberg v. Weinberg, 247 A.D.2d 535).
The husband's remaining contentions are without merit.
KRAUSMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.