DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioner's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim against The Enlarged City School District of Middletown, New York and its officers, agents, servants and employees (hereinafter the School District) ( see Matter of Plantin v. New York City Hous. Auth., 203 A.D.2d 579). The proffered excuses for the delay, that the petitioner was unaware of the filing requirement and that he was unaware of the extent of his injuries, were not adequate ( see Matter of Eaddy v. County of Nassau, 282 A.D.2d 675; Matter of Ragin v. City of New York, 222 A.D.2d 678; Matter of Gomez v. City of New York, 250 A.D.2d 443). Furthermore, although an incident report was prepared within 90 days of the incident, it was insufficient to provide the School District with actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the petitioner's claim ( see Matter of Rusiecki v. Clarkstown Cent. School Dist., 227 A.D.2d 493; Matter of Sica v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 226 A.D.2d 542; Matter of Ryder v. Garden City School Dist., 277 A.D.2d 388).
SMITH, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, H. MILLER and TOWNES, JJ., concur.