Opinion
No. 92-2240
Submitted October 11, 1994 —
Decided November 16, 1994.
ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
Porter, Wright, Morris Arthur and Richard M. Markus; Cooper, Straub, Walinski Cramer, Richard S. Walinski and Joseph P. Thacker; Hedland, Hanley John and Peter C. John, for appellee.
Vorys, Sater, Seymour Pease, Duke W. Thomas and Sandra J. Anderson; Fuller Henry, Thomas S. Zaremba and Sue A. Sikkema, for appellants.
Defendants-appellants, Libbey-Owens-Ford Company and Pilkington Holdings, Inc., have filed with this court a motion to reconsider our September 14, 1994 decision (reported at 70 Ohio St.3d 271, 638 N.E.2d 572) in the above-captioned matter.
After consideration of appellants' motion, we will treat it as a motion for clarification and grant same to the extent that the first sentence of the third full paragraph appearing at page 277, 638 N.E.2d at 576, should read as follows:
"We are likewise unpersuaded by the argument that LOF was a third-party beneficiary of the contract executed by TRINOVA and Pilkington."
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur.
A.W. SWEENEY and WRIGHT, JJ., dissent.
RESNICK, J., not participating.