Can a plaintiff advance an invasion-of-privacy claim based on a hidden camera, without offering proof of an actual recording, using the “intrusion upon seclusion” argument?

In Friedman v. Martinez, a civil case over a janitor planting a secret camera in an office building women’s bathroom, the state Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division’s decision and reinstated a summary judgment dismissal against one group of plaintiffs, holding that although they had to show some proof that they were in the restroom or vicinity, they did not have to show proof of being recorded.