
    Sabo, Appellant, v. MICO Insurance Company, Appellee.
    [Cite as Sabo v. MICO Ins. Co. (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 492.]
    (No. 93-1474
    Submitted August 31, 1994
    Decided October 5, 1994.)
    
      Scanlon & Henretta Co., L.P.A., Lawrence J. Scanlon and Ann Marie O’Brien; Colopy & Casalinuovo and Daniel M. Colopy, for appellant.
    
      Roderick, Myers & Linton and Kurt R. Weitendorf, for appellee.
    
      Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz, Ronald E. Schultz and Kimberly K. Harshbarger, urging reversal for amicus curiae, Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers.
   The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court to apply Martin v. Midwestern Group Ins. Co. (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 478, 639 N.E.2d 438, decided today.

A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

Moyer, C.J., concurs separately.

Wright, J., dissents for the reason stated in the dissenting opinions in Martin v. Midwestern Group Ins. Co. (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 478, 485-486, 639 N.E.2d 438, 443.

Moyer, C.J.,

concurring separately. I concur separately in the judgment entry in the above-styled case. As my dissent in Martin v. Midwestern Group Ins. Co. (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 478, 485, 639 N.E.2d 438, 443, stated, I do not agree with the law announced in the majority decision. Nevertheless, it is the law on the issue in the above-styled case. As I believe all parties should receive equal application of the law- announced by this court, and only for that reason, I concur in the judgment entry.  