Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
The defendant made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by presenting proof that the infant plaintiff, who was riding a motorized bicycle, exited a driveway and collided into the defendant's motor vehicle in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1143 and 1173 ( see Yasinosky v Lenio, 28 AD3d 652, 653; Lallemand v Cook, 23 AD3d 533; Trzepacz v Jara, 11 AD3d 531; Ferrara v Castro, 283 AD2d 392). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The fact that the infant plaintiff did not see the defendant's approaching car does not excuse the infant plaintiffs conduct ( see Ferrara v Castro, 283 AD2d at 393; Bolta v Lohan, 242 AD2d 356). Furthermore, the infant plaintiffs affidavit failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the defendant's alleged failure to take evasive action ( see McNamara v Fishkowitz, 18 AD3d 721, 722; Meliarenne v Prisco, 9 AD3d 353, 354; Lupowitz v Fogarty, 295 AD2d 576). Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been granted.