Liability under § 240(1) is not limited to cases in which the falling object is being hoisted or secured. It also applies where the plaintiff demonstrates that, at the time the object fell, it required securing. However, the statute does not automatically apply simply because an object fell and injured a worker, and a plaintiff must show that the object fell because of the absence or inadequacy of a safety device of the kind enumerated in the statute. While a plaintiff is not required to present evidence as to which particular safety devices would have prevented the injury, the risk requiring a safety device must be foreseeable and inherent in the work being done.
Carlton v. City of New York, NY Slip Op 03500 (2d Dep't May 16, 2018)
Here is the decision.
