
    Indiana Insurance Company, Appellee, v. Farmers Insurance of Columbus, Inc. et al., Appellees; Federal Insurance Company, Appellant. Indiana Insurance Company, Appellee, v. Farmers Insurance of Columbus, Inc. et al.; Cincinnati Insurance Company, Appellant. Indiana Insurance Company, Appellee, v. Farmers Insurance of Columbus, Inc. et al.; Federal Insurance Company, Appellant.
    [Cite as Indiana Ins. Co. v. Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc., 101 Ohio St.3d 1231, 2004-Ohio-735.]
    (Nos. 2003-1861, 2003-1869, and 2003-2027
    Submitted February 3, 2004
    Decided March 3, 2004.)
   {¶ 1} The motions for this court to reconsider the judgment entries in Indiana Ins. Co. v. Farmers Ins. of Columbus, 100 Ohio St.3d 1547, 2003-Ohio-6879, 800 N.E.2d 752 (two entries), and Indiana Ins. Co. v. Farmers Ins. of Columbus, 100 Ohio St.3d 1542, 2003-Ohio-6879, 800 N.E.2d 748, are denied.

John S. Coury and Nanette Degarmo Von Allman, for appellees Vernon L. McDonald and Lori Scott in case Nos. 2003-1861, 2003-1869, and 2003-2027.

Gallagher, Sharp, Fulton & Norman, Timothy J. Fitzgerald, D. John Travis and Richard C.O. Rezie, for appellant Federal Insurance Company in case Nos. 2003-1861 and 2003-2027.

Baker, Dublikar, Beck, Wiley & Mathews and James F. Mathews, for appellant Cincinnati Insurance Company in case No. 2003-1869.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs separately.

O’Donnell, J., concurs in 2003-1861 and 2003-1869, but would grant reconsideration in 2003-2027.

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

concurring.

{¶ 2} I concur with the decision to deny reconsideration. However, as I stated in my concurring opinion in Fish v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co., 101 Ohio St.3d 1210, 2004-Ohio-224, 802 N.E.2d 149, I believe that Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-Ohio-5849, 797 N.E.2d 1256, applies to all pending cases where a claim has been raised under Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 660, 710 N.E.2d 1116. Here, the appellate court has remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings on the issue of an award of prejudgment interest. A remand of these proceedings, however, should include application of Galatis.  