Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Prior orders of Supreme Court, Nassau County (Oppido, J.), dated June 24, 1982 and August 1, 1983, clearly directed that the plaintiff husband pay $400 per week in temporary maintenance to the defendant wife for her support alone. Although the defendant's subsequent motion requesting upward modification of maintenance and other relief should, if possible, have been transferred to Justice Oppido (see, CPLR 2221), Justice Burke's order directing that the plaintiff pay child support and carrying charges on the marital residence was justified by the inadequate and haphazard payments that the plaintiff had been making for these purposes, and therefore did not constitute an improper modification of Justice Oppido's prior order (see, Watras v Watras, 43 A.D.2d 520). Contrary to the plaintiff's assertion, the defendant's application was not tantamount to a motion for reargument. We note that with respect to that portion of the defendant's motion seeking an upward modification of her personal maintenance, Justice Burke did defer to Justice Oppido's previous disposition of the issue.
The plaintiff's argument that the award of temporary maintenance and child support is excessive rings hollow in view of his admitted substantial income and his unwillingness to reveal the full extent of his income and assets. In any event, the most effective remedy for any seeming inequity in an award of temporary maintenance and child support is a speedy trial where the facts regarding the parties' finances and standards of living can be ascertained (see, Brown v Brown, 54 A.D.2d 553). Weinstein, J.P., Niehoff, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.