Howard Kurtz covers the Estrich-Kinsley feud in his Washington Post column today. (Thanks, as usual, to LAObserved for the link.) A couple previously-unreported tidbits:

On Feb. 18, Times Editor John Carroll wrote Estrich to complain about "the extravagant malice of your comments about Mike Kinsley." Estrich responded by accusing him of "constitutionally impermissible libel" and said her attorney would contact him.

Can you really sue someone for libel for criticizing you in a private communication? I want to say "no" but I'm worried Estrich would find a way to sue me.

Also, according to Kurtz, Estrich "claims that she never intended the correspondence to become public and that 'it's not personal' against Kinsley." Which is a strange assertion given that Kurtz also reports that she cc:ed Matt Drudge on the letter (or a similar version thereof) wherein she suggested that Kinsley's Parkinsnon's disease "may have affected [his] brain." Sending Matt Drudge a letter in which you accuse someone of being brain-damaged sure is a funny way of not intending a dispute to become public and/or personal.