In Gay v. William Hill Manor, Inc., 74 Md. App. 51, 536 A.2d 690, cert, denied, 312 Md. 601, 541 A.2d 964 (1988), Gay, a nurse's aide, was fired by the nursing home for which she worked for allegedly covering the face of a difficult patient with a pillow. After her discharge, Gay filed a claim with ESA for unemployment insurance benefits. The employer disclosed that Gay had been terminated for "violation of Patient Bill of Rights which the facility follows, physical mistreatment of a resident, inciting disobedience to rules and regulations of the facility, and unsatisfactory work performance and attitude." Id. at 56. Thereafter, Gay filed suit against her former employer, alleging, inter alia, defamation. After the circuit court granted the employer's post-trial motion, Gay appealed. He argued that the report submitted to ESA was defamatory and beyond the scope of the employer's qualified privilege. The Court recognized that, pursuant to Md. Code, Art, 95A, 12(g) (2), the predecessor to L.S. 8-105, the report or communication could not be used as an underlying basis for a defamation suit, unless shown to be false and malicious. Id. at 56. Further, the Court ruled that it was "unable to conclude that the employer's statement was made with malice," or that it "exceeded the scope of its qualified privilege." Id. at 57.