Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Even though a statement may otherwise be defamatory, it is protected by a qualified privilege where the communication is made to persons who have some common interest in the subject matter ( see Foster v Churchill, 87 NY2d 744, 751; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437). Here, the defendants established, prima facie, that the allegedly defamatory statements were protected by a qualified privilege and, in opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the qualified privilege applied ( see Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429). Accordingly, the court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.