Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Equitable distribution presents matters of fact to be resolved by the trial court, and its distribution of the parties' marital property should not be disturbed unless it can be shown that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in so doing ( Petrie v. Petrie, 124 A.D.2d 449; see also, Carpenter v. Carpenter, 202 A.D.2d 813; Bossard v. Bossard, 199 A.D.2d 971). We find that the Supreme Court's valuation and distribution of the marital property in this case was not an improvident exercise of discretion.
The husband's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Miller, J.P., Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.