Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

3-16-2007

Buck Consul Inc v. Glenpointe Assoc Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 05-4685

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007

Recommended Citation "Buck Consul Inc v. Glenpointe Assoc" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 1462. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/1462

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________

No. 05-4685 _______________

BUCK CONSULTANTS, INC.

v.

GLENPOINTE ASSOCIATES, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff

v.

MELLON FINANCIAL CORPORATION, Third-Party Defendant

Glenpointe Associates, Appellant _________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil No. 03-00454) District Judge: Jose L. Linares _________________________

Argued November 28, 2006

Before: RENDELL and AMBRO, Circuit Judges PRATTER,* District Judge

____________________

*Honorable Gene E.K. Pratter, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. _______________

ORDER AMENDING OPINION _______________

AND NOW, this 16 th day of March, 2007, the above Opinion and Judgment filed

on February 9, 2007 is amended as follows:

Opinion:

Page 2, par. 2 replace first sentence with “For the reasons below, we affirm the

finding with respect to unreasonableness and vacate and remand the District Court’s

finding that Glenpointe acted in bad faith.”

Page 22, par. 1 add footnote at the end of second sentence: “By noting the

inadequacy of the record presented to us, together with the District Court’s use of the

incorrect standard for determining bad faith, we are not foreclosing the District Court’s

possible determination on remand to undertake a closer re-examination of the full record

in the new light of our opinion (and permit additional evidence if it should desire to do

so) and, on the basis thereof, consider whether summary judgment should be awarded to

one party or the other. Of course, if that re-examination continues to disclose any genuine

issue of material factual disputes concerning bad faith, the resolution of such disputes

must be left to a jury.”

Page 23, par. 2 replace sentence with “We affirm the District Court’s finding with

respect to the unreasonableness of Glenpointe’s withholding of its consent, but vacate and

remand the Court’s decision with regard to bad faith, and reverse its decision to terminate the Lease.”

Judgment:

Page 2, par. 2, first sentence should be “ORDERED and ADJUDGED by this Court that

the Order of the District Court entered on September 20, 2005 is hereby Affirmed in part,

Vacated and Remanded in part, and Reversed in part.”

BY THE COURT:

S/Gene E.K. Pratter Gene E.K. Pratter United States District Court Judge

CMD/cc: John J. Gibbons, Esq. David M. Kohane, Esq. Michael S. Meisel, Esq. B. John Pendleton, Esq.