Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court may enforce a pendente lite order granting maintenance or child support by granting leave to enter a money judgment for arrears pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 244, even where the application for such relief is made after the entry of the final judgment in the matrimonial action (see, Siddiqui v Siddiqui, 118 A.D.2d 846, 847; Treherne-Thomas v Treherne-Thomas, 267 App. Div. 509; Wormley v Wormley, 267 App. Div. 85; see also, Mazer v Mazer, 276 App. Div. 733, mod on other grounds 301 N.Y. 774; White v White, 205 Misc. 1042; 19A Carmody-Wait 2d, N Y Prac § 118:111). This rule must be distinguished from the rule which precludes enforcement of a pendente lite order by way of civil contempt after the termination of the matrimonial action (see, Polizotti v Polizotti, 305 N.Y. 176, revg 280 App. Div. 229; Weaver v Weaver, 72 A.D.2d 221; Prothers v Prothers, 283 App. Div. 747; Mittman v Mittman, 263 App. Div. 384; 19A Carmody-Wait 2d, N Y Prac § 118:111). To the extent that this distinction was not observed in the decision of this court in Sorkin v Sorkin ( 111 A.D.2d 845, 846), we overrule that case. Further, we decline to follow the decision of the Appellate Division, First Department, in Perrotta v Perrotta ( 149 A.D.2d 317). We have examined the appellant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.