Summary
In Tregellas v Tregellas (169 AD2d 553, 553 [1st Dept 1991]), the Court merely found that the particular prenuptial agreement in that case did not bar an award of temporary support.
Summary of this case from Anonymous v. AnonymousOpinion
January 22, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.).
The prenuptial agreement waiving any right to maintenance does not bar temporary relief prior to dissolution of the marriage. Defendant is entitled to be maintained at the standard to which she has become accustomed during the course of the marriage (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a]). If either party is aggrieved the best remedy is a speedy trial (Sayer v Sayer, 130 A.D.2d 407).
With regard to interim counsel fees, indigency is not a prerequisite for such a discretionary award; rather, the court must be guided by the financial circumstances of the parties, as well as the relative merits of their positions in the case (DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete, 70 N.Y.2d 879). The defendant should not have to deplete her assets in order to have legal representation comparable to that of plaintiff (Wolf v Wolf, 160 A.D.2d 555, 556).
Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Ross, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.