Opinion
February 5, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, without costs or disbursements, and the application is denied.
The petitioner did not explain why it took eight months to consult an attorney after his accident and why an additional four months elapsed before he made an application for leave to file a late notice of claim. The failure to provide such an explanation requires denial of the application (see, Matter of Perry v City of New York, 133 A.D.2d 692; Kravitz v County of Rockland, 112 A.D.2d 352). Moreover, although a police report was filed regarding the accident, a police report regarding an automobile accident does not of itself constitute notice of the accident to a municipality (see, Matter of Morris v County of Suffolk, 88 A.D.2d 956, affd 58 N.Y.2d 767; Tarquinio v City of New York, 84 A.D.2d 265). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.