The court, after determining that the referee had duly considered the factors set forth in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B)(6)(a), properly exercised its discretion in increasing the recommended maintenance award to the wife, despite the relatively short duration of the marriage and her good health, in light of the marked disparity between the parties' income and earning capacity (see, Denholz v. Denholz, 147 A.D.2d 522, 524 appeal dismissed 74 N.Y.2d 716; see also, Brownstein v. Brownstein, 167 A.D.2d 127, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 806). For the same reason, the court's increase in the award of counsel fees was also proper (see, Weiss v. Weiss, 213 A.D.2d 542; see also, Anonymous v. Anonymous, 213 A.D.2d 183;Wexler v. Wexler, 162 A.D.2d 326), particularly in light of the referee's finding that plaintiff wife's monthly expenditures exceeded her income.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.