The offending statements contained in defendants' letter to plaintiff, advising that defendants had been retained to represent plaintiffs former employee, that the employee had possible claims against plaintiff in addition to those she had already brought before the New York City Commission on Human Rights, and describing the allegations behind those claims, are absolutely privileged ( see, Caplan v. Winslett:, 218 A.D.2d 148; Grasso v. Mathew, 164 A.D.2d 476, 479, lv dismissed 77 N.Y.2d 940, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 855).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.