The proceeding is time-barred as it was commenced more than four months after respondent informed petitioner of its determination that she had violated its regulations by using force as a disciplinary technique, and that her name would "remain on the Ineligible Inquiry list, terminating [her] services with [respondent]" (CPLR 217). Petitioner's time to commence the proceeding was not extended by her administrative appeal of this determination ( Matter of Frasier v Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y., 71 NY2d 763, 766-767). In any event, respondent's finding that petitioner engaged in corporeal punishment is not arbitrary and capricious ( see Matter of Von Gizycki v Levy, 3 AD3d 572, 574), and the finding of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that petitioner did not engage in corporeal punishment lacks preclusive effect (Labor Law § 623; Wooten v New York City Dept. of Gen. Servs., 207 AD2d 754, 754, lv denied 84 NY2d 813).