Opinion
May 17, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
On the instant appeal, the defendant argues that the pendente lite awards of maintenance and child support were excessive. We disagree. Temporary maintenance and child support are designed to insure that a needy spouse is provided with funds for his or her support and reasonable needs pending trial, and a speedy trial is the best remedy for perceived inequities in such awards (see, Beil v Beil, 192 A.D.2d 498; Polito v Polito, 168 A.D.2d 440; Shapiro v Shapiro, 163 A.D.2d 294; Cohen v Cohen, 129 A.D.2d 550). On the instant record, which is replete with conflicting affidavits, we see no reason to substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court. It considered all of the relevant factors, and the award, given the parties' standard of living, is not excessive. Miller, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.