Opinion
January 24, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Kubiniec, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and Pine, JJ.
Judgment unanimously modified, on the facts, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: In our view, the court erred in making a maintenance award of $250 per week for a period of 12 years. Plaintiff is relatively young, is in good health, and has a college education with a business major. In the early years of the marriage, plaintiff was employed by the Federal Government as a payroll clerk. Subsequently, she conducted her own business wherein she maintained business records and kept the payroll. In making its award, the court failed to give appropriate consideration to all of the factors which should be considered in making an award of maintenance (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a] [3]; Lemczak v Lemczak, 105 A.D.2d 1157). The duration of the maintenance award should be fixed at three years, which will assure that plaintiff's reasonable needs will be provided for and, at the same time, she will have an appropriate incentive to become financially independent (Hillmann v Hillmann, 109 A.D.2d 777, 778).
The court did not err in awarding the full value of the Kittinger furniture to the plaintiff (see, Ackley v Ackley, 100 A.D.2d 153, 156, lv dismissed 63 N.Y.2d 772).
We have considered defendant's other arguments raised on this appeal and find them to without merit.