[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 87 Ohio St.3d 448.]

[THE STATE EX REL.] MTD PRODUCTS, INC., APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO; HALL, APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel. MTD Products, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 2000-Ohio-455.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 99-485—Submitted November 16, 1999—Decided January 12, 2000.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-320. __________________ Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, L.L.P., and David J. Kovach, for appellee. Dean G. Reinhard Co., L.P.A., and Charles Zamora, for appellant. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent. __________________ ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and reinstate the order of the Industrial Commission. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________