Once a divorce summons has been filed and served the "automatic orders" are effective. (To be more precise they are effective on the spouse that filed even before service on the other spouse.) The automatic orders prohibit withdrawals, transfers, borrowing against or similar actions other than in the normal course of household expenses, bill paying and for attorney's fees without mutual consent or a court order.
Just before a divorce starts (automatic orders not in effect yet) spouses will consider whether to take or transfer into an account in their name alone all or the vast majority of the bank account deposits. They consider this to be a form of protection or perhaps a form of control. It is usually a bad idea. There are exceptions as is true with most all legal issues.
A typical situation might be that one spouse works and the other is the homemaker with two unemancipated children living at home. They have the usual monthly bills of a family their size and the working parent earns $125,000. They have $25,000 in savings, the checkbook balance floats up and down, some retirement savings and some credit card debt. In that situation taking all of the money just before the divorce starts is likely, if not definitely, a bad idea. Leaving the non-working spouse with no income and no money available will create panic, an immediate court application, a request for attorney's fees and a likely order stating what bills the working parent must pay (the majority) and to return half the money to the homemaker spouse. If the homemaker spouse took all of the money an order to return half will usually follow and then the apportionment of bills and/or child support and spousal support to the non-working parent.
The court does not want to see one parent at a complete advantage over the other parent whether living together or separated. The court typically does not look favorably on the taking of all or the vast majority of funds.
In contrast, when one party has annual income of several hundred thousand dollars or has substantial non-marital assets, the result might be different based on the substantial funds available to the party with high income or whichever party has significant pre-marital assets or separate property (inheritance as an example). When both parties have substantial income, assets or family resources the result may be quite different and will be highly fact sensitive. In that situation the court may perceive no immediate need to restore funds if there are sufficient assets that will enable both parties to support themselves and to make corrections later in the case.
However, for most people the immediate "money grab" creates high conflict, drama, expense and sets the tone for a contentious divorce. If you already have an attorney retained it will be prudent to obtain legal advice before taking this step.