In Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Eiec. Co., 81 NY2d 494 [1993]) the plaintiff, a welder, who was assigned to weld a seam near the top of an elevated shaft, allegedly suffered back strain, because the platform that he was working on was placed over the shaft in such a way as required him to work in a contorted position (id. at 498). The plaintiff in Ross argued that he was entitled to recover under Labor Law 240 (1), "because his injury was 'related to the effects of gravity' in that it was allegedly produced by [his] need to work in a contorted position in order to avoid falling down the deep shaft on which he was working" (id. at 500). In finding that Labor Law 240 (1) did not apply to the facts of the case, the Court of Appeals in Ross noted that "the problem with plaintiff's argument is that it misconstrues the import of our analysis in Rocovich . . . . The 'special hazards' to which we referred in Rocovich . . . do not encompass any and all perils that may be connected in some tangential way with the effects of gravity. Rather, the 'special hazards' referred to are limited to such specific gravity-related accidents as falling from a height or being struck by a falling object that was improperly hoisted or inadequately secured'" (id. at 500-501.) The Ross court further explained that Labor Law 240 (1) "was designed to prevent those types of accidents in which a scaffold, hoist, ladder or other protective device proved inadequate to shield the injured worker from harm directly flowing from the application of the force of gravity to an object or person," and that it "[did] not extend to other types of harm, even if the harm in question was caused by an inadequate, malfunctioning or defectively designed scaffold, stay or hoist" (id. at 501). Therefore, "however unsafe the makeshift 'scaffold' may have been . . . it cannot be said that the device did not serve the core objective of Labor Law 240 (1) -- preventing plaintiff from falling down the shaft. In that regard, the device did not malfunction and was not defective in it's design" (id.).