Entin v. Entin

Full title: ARLENE ENTIN, Respondent, v. LEON ENTIN, Appellant

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 9, 1994

204 A.D.2d 385 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

614 N.Y.S.2d 171

Opinion

May 9, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant has failed to provide any evidence to demonstrate that the pendente lite award constituted an improper exercise of discretion (see, Filosa v. Raven-Filosa, 185 A.D.2d 225; Guiry v Guiry, 159 A.D.2d 556). Moreover, the remedy for a pendente lite award claimed to be unsatisfactory is a speedy trial, at which a more detailed examination of the situation of the parties may be made (see, Filosa v. Raven-Filosa, supra; Erdheim v. Erdheim, 101 A.D.2d 803). Lawrence, J.P., Copertino, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.