June 26, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff wife contends that the award of maintenance was insufficient to maintain the standard of living to which she had become accustomed, and the defendant husband contends that the award of maintenance was excessive. The amount of maintenance is a matter left to the sound discretion of the trial court (see, Loeb v. Loeb, 186 A.D.2d 174; Petrie v. Petrie, 124 A.D.2d 449). The Court of Appeals has recently stated that the trial court must consider the payee spouse's reasonable needs and "standard of living in the context of the other enumerated statutory factors, and then, in [its] discretion, fashion a fair and equitable maintenance award accordingly (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B]  [a] -)" (Hartog v. Hartog, 85 N.Y.2d 36, 52). Under all of the circumstances of the case, including the parties' income, their respective tax obligations and needs, all of which were considered by the trial court, the amount awarded to the wife as maintenance was representative of the standard of living to which she had become accustomed and represented a fair award.
We have reviewed the parties' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.