Opinion
November 6, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the order entered July 8, 1988, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as that order was superseded by the order entered September 29, 1988, made upon reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order entered September 29, 1988, is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof which directed that the award of temporary maintenance "be paid effective April 27, 1988", and substituting therefor a provision that the award of temporary maintenance be paid effective May 2, 1988; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
We find that the award of $275 per week as pendente lite maintenance and $1,250 as temporary counsel fees is reasonable in light of the relative economic positions of the parties (see, Gunn v Gunn, 143 A.D.2d 393; Van Ess v Van Ess, 100 A.D.2d 848; Palmer v Palmer, 76 A.D.2d 905). We note, moreover, that the remedy for alleged inequities in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial at which a more detailed examination of the parties' financial circumstances may be conducted (see, Sherman v Sherman, 135 A.D.2d 806; Isham v Isham, 123 A.D.2d 742; Chosed v Chosed, 116 A.D.2d 690).
Additionally, we find that the Supreme Court properly required the husband to make payments of temporary maintenance retroactive to the date of the wife's application for pendente lite relief (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a]; Bernstein v Bernstein, 143 A.D.2d 168; Salerno v Salerno, 142 A.D.2d 670; Khalily v Khalily, 99 A.D.2d 482). However, the award of temporary maintenance should be made effective as of May 2, 1988, the date of service of the wife's application (see, Dooley v Dooley, 128 A.D.2d 669) and the order entered September 29, 1988 is, therefore, modified to reflect this date.
We have examined the plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Lawrence, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.