| Nimkoff v Nimkoff |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 00401 [69 AD3d 501] |
| January 21, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Nancy Waldbaum Nimkoff, Respondent, v Ronald A.Nimkoff, Appellant. |
—[*1]
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura E. Drager, J.), entered September 14, 2009,which, in this matrimonial action, inter alia, denied defendant husband's application for counselfees to retain an attorney for the economic trial of this matter and to oppose plaintiff's appeal andalso reserved for trial his request for downward modification of his child support obligations,unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion forprospective counsel fees and expenses in the absence of a showing of financial hardship and theestimated value and extent of the legal services contemplated (see Block v Block, 296AD2d 343, 344 [2002]). Moreover, it is well-settled that in the absence of a substantial andunanticipated change in circumstances, not here demonstrated, the proper remedy for anyperceived inequity in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial (see Ayoub v Ayoub, 63 AD3d 493, 496-497 [2009]).Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Sweeny, Catterson and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.