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Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential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 Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
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.