Petitioner contends that the hearing panel made various errors of law and fact in rendering its decision. Petitioner requests that I substitute my judgment for that of the hearing panel and find respondent guilty of specification 10 of Charge I and Charge II, and authorize respondent's dismissal. On the merits, respondent argues that the panel did not err in dismissing specification 10 and Charge II and claims that the penalty imposed should not be disturbed. Respondent has raised several procedural issues which I will first address. Respondent asserts that substituted service on his spouse was improper because petitioner did not exercise due diligence in attempting to personally serve him, and that he was served too late in the day.
Petitioner alleges no other attempts to personally serve respondent.
Matter of Community School Bd. Since there is no evidence whatsoever of petitioner's prior attempts to serve respondent personally, I find the use of substitute service, under the circumstances presented here, impermissible. Since petitioner has not demonstrated that proper service was made upon respondent, the appeal must be dismissed. Because the appeal is procedurally defective, I cannot reach the merits of petitioner's claims.