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.

Schwartz, Appellant, v. Comcorp, Inc., d.b.a. Sun Newspapers, et al., Appellees. [Schwartz v. Comcorp, Inc. (1994), Ohio St.3d .]

Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. (No. 93-588 -- Submitted March 30, 1994 -- Decided May 4, 1994.)

Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 63479.

Kramer & Tobocman Co., L.P.A., and Suzanne M. Nigro; Friedman & Gilbert and Terry Gilbert, for appellant.

Duvin, Cahn, Barnard & Messerman, Andrew C. Meyer and Robert M. Wolff, for appellees.

Spater, Gittes, Schulte & Kolman and Frederick M. Gittes; Louis A. Jacobs; and William Johnson, urging reversal for amicus curiae, Ohio Employment Lawyers Association.

The appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., Wright, Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., concur.

A.W. Sweeney, Douglas and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.

Douglas, J., dissenting. I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the court of appeals on the election-of-remedy issue but affirm the court of appeals on the merit issue of alleged age discrimination. There is no age discrimination in this case and appellees are entitled to have a final judgment from this court on this issue.

A.W. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.