
    Spangler, Appellant, v. Kehres, Appellee.
    [Cite as Spangler v. Kehres (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 1218.]
    (No. 95-1130
    Submitted at the New Philadelphia Session April 17, 1996
    Decided June 12, 1996.)
    
      Clark, Perdue, Roberts & Scott Co., L.P.A., and Edward L. Clark, for appellant.
    
      Sauter & Hohenberger and Kenneth R. Beddow, for appellee.
   The appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas, J., dissents.

Resnick, J., dissents separately.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

dissenting. I would reverse the court of appeals’ judgment. Summary judgment should not have been granted, since there was a genuine issue of material fact. Additionally, reviewing this case would give us an opportunity to restrict Marchetti v. Kalish (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 95, 559 N.E.2d 699.  