Louis R. Vallies, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated vehicle buyers v. Sky Bank, an Ohio Bank licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
__________
No. 05-1002
__________
LOUIS R. VALLIES, individually and on behalf of all similarly
situated vehicle buyers,
Appellant
v.
SKY BANK, an Ohio Bank licensed to do business in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Appellee
___________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania
(Dist. Ct. Case No. 01-cv-1438)
___________
O R D E R
__________
BEFORE: SMITH, STAPLETON and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges
__________
Our opinion in the above case, filed on January 5, 2006, is hereby
amended pursuant to the following: Footnote number one, on pages four
and five, will be struck in its entirety, along with the corresponding
sentence, on page four, “Fitts was not Sky Bank’s agent and at all relevant
times acted independently.” Additionally, on page six, the sentence,
“Moreover, nothing contained in the agreement would suggest to Vallies
that Fitts was acting on the bank’s behalf in entering it.” will be inserted

-- 1 of 2 --

directly prior to the sentence, “Instead, the agreement was signed only by
Vallies and Fitts.” Finally, “we reverse the grant of summary judgment” on
the last line on page 17 will be replaced with, “we reverse its order granting
the motion to dismiss”.
It is so ordered.
By the Court,
/s/ Richard L. Nygaard
_____________________
United States Circuit Judge
Dated: February 1, 2006

-- 2 of 2 --