In Narducci v. Manhasset Bay Assocs. (96 N.Y.2d 259, 267, 750 N.E.2d 1085, 727 N.Y.S.2d 37 [2001]), the Court described cases involving these risks as "falling worker" and "falling object" cases respectively. But, as the Court said in Narducci, "not every worker who falls at a construction site, and not every object that falls on a worker, gives rise to the extraordinary protections of Labor Law 240 (1)" (id.). In some cases involving falls of workers and objects, the Court held that where a plaintiff "was exposed to the usual and ordinary dangers of a construction site, and not the extraordinary elevation risks envisioned by Labor Law 240 (1)," the plaintiff cannot recover under the statute (Rodriguez v. Margaret Tietz Ctr. for Nursing Care, Inc., 84 N.Y.2d 841, 843, 640 N.E.2d 1134, 616 N.Y.S.2d 900 [1994]).