Petitioner then appealed to the Appellate Division, First Department. Petitioner's stay application was denied on June 21, 1993. Petitioner maintains that the proceeding should be dismissed as illegal and void for want of jurisdiction. Respondents raise several defenses including untimeliness and failure to state a cause of action. Respondents further argue that this is an attempt to appeal an interlocutory ruling within the context of a disciplinary proceeding.
Respondents maintain that the panel chairman's decision was lawful and proper in all respects.
The appeal must be dismissed as untimely. The petition contains no reason why the appeal was not timely commenced. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as untimely. Petitioner's appeal seeks review of the denial of her motion to dismiss the charges, made within the context of a pending ' 3020-a proceeding. Petitioner's appeal also contests the legality of a certain hearing during the proceeding.