The Bugle moved for summary judgment under Rule 56, filing with its motion copies of the articles. The bugle also filed affidavits by the authors describing the research undertaken to get the facts, setting forth their belief that the articles as published were true, and firmly denying they were in any way motivated by malice toward Thomas. Thomas filed no counter-affidavits, but chose to rely upon the allegations in his complaint and upon a legal brief citing the rule on defamation applicable to the case at hand. That rule, which Thomas correctly stated, is that a publication defamatory of a public official is not actionable unless it was made with actual malice, that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. Paula Post has brought an action in the federal district court for Delaware against the Dixie Insurance Company.
Diversity jurisdiction is established.
The complaint alleges that plaintiff ran a retail business in a building she owned, that she obtained full-coverage fire insurance form defendant and the entire building was destroyed by fire, but defendant has in bad faith refused to make payment on the insurance policy. In its answer, defendant alleged, among other things, that plaintiff intentionally arranged to have a fire set in order to burn down the building. Under the applicable law, a simple refusal to pay in breach of the policy would subject defendant to ordinary contract damages. By use of interrogatories, plaintiff has established that for a period of three months immediately following the fire, defendant had its investigators interview a substantial number of potential witnesses and obtain written statements by them. Answers to the interrogatories also disclose that shortly after the fire, defendant retained the services of an engineer experienced in finding and evaluating indications of arson and a month later received a report from this engineer.