Nicit v. Nicit

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in reducing his maintenance obligation by only $250 per month. We disagree. In seeking modification of his maintenance obligation, defendant bore the burden of demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]; Chisholm v Chisholm, 138 AD2d 829, 830). “Determining whether a substantial change has occurred and the extent of relief occasioned by such a change are matters addressed to the discretion of the trial court, with each case turning on its…