OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer.

Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.

Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.

Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.

NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the full texts of the opinions after they have been released electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.

The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

Freeman, Admr., Appellee, v. Holzer Medical Center, Appellant, et al. [Cite as Freeman v. Holzer Med. Ctr. (1993), Ohio St.3d .]

Appellate procedure -- Supreme Court jurisdiction -- Certified conflict case -- Dismissal of appeal when no conflict exists -- Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed, when. (Nos. 92-1169 and 92-1005 -- Submitted March 10, 1993 -- Decided June 30, 1993.)

Certified by and Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Gallia County, No. 91 CA 8.

Wilcox, Schlosser & Bendig Co., L.P.A., and Charles H.

Bendig; and John J. Duffey, for appellee.

Earl, Warburton, Adams & Davis, Ted L. Earl and Grier D.

Schaffer, for appellant.

The cause in case No. 92-1169 came before this court upon the certification of the court of appeals that its judgment conflicted with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Franklin County in McCrory v. Children's Hosp. (1986), 28 Ohio App.3d 49, 28 OBR 61, 501 N.E.2d 1238, upon the following question: "* * * [W]hether a party is provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate issues in the Court of Claims such that the rule requiring a mutuality of parties may be relaxed and [that appellee Joy L. Freeman] can be collaterally estopped from relitigating those issues in subsequent jury trials against different parties." Having examined McCrory and the record in the present cause, we find that the judgments do not conflict on the certified question. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

State v. Palider (1987), 33 Ohio St.3d 68, 514 N.E.2d 873; Cook v. Mayfield (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 44, 523 N.E.2d 502; Hays v. St. Elizabeth Hosp. Med. Ctr. (1988), 38 Ohio St.3d 60, 526 N.E.2d 307; State v. Radar (1989), 47 Ohio St.3d 112, 548 N.E.2d 210; State v. Parobek (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 61, 550 N.E.2d 476; Whitelock v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d , N.E.2d , paragraph one of the syllabus; and Section 3(B)(4), Article IV, Ohio Constitution.

Finding no conflict on the certified question, we dismiss the appeal in case No. 92-1005 as having been improvidently allowed.

A.W. Sweeney, Acting C.J., Spellacy, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

Leo M. Spellacy, J., of the Eighth Appellate District, sitting for Moyer, C.J.