
    Doylestown & Danboro Turnpike Road Company v. Bucks County, Appellant.
    Argued Feb. 26, 1917.
    Appeal, No. 74, Jan. T., 1916, by defendant, from order of C. P. Delaware Co., June T., 1914, No. 6, granting a new trial, in case of President and Managers of the Doylestown & Danboro Turnpike Road Company v. County of Bucks.
    Before Brown, C. J., Mestrezat, Stewart, Moschzisker and Frazer, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Appeal from award of viewers in condemnation proceedings. Before Johnson, P. J. .. .
    The facts appear in Danboro & Plumsteadville Turnpike Road Co. v. Bucks County, 258 Pa. 391.
    
      Verdict for defendant by direction of the court. The court subsequently set aside the verdict and granted a new trial/ Defendant appealed.
    
      Errors assigned
    
    were in setting aside the verdict and in granting a new trial.
    
      William I. Schaffer, with him Hiram H. Keller and E. Wallace Chadwick, for appellant.
    
      Harman Y erkes, with him V. Gilpin Robinson, for appellees.
    
      William H. Keller, First Deputy Attorney General, with him Francis Shank Brown, Attorney General, for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Intervening Appellee.
    June 30, 1917:
   Opinion by

Mr. Justice Stewart,

The questions raised in this case are identical with those raised in the case of Danboro & Plumsteadville Turnpike Eoad Company v. Bucks County, in which the opinion has just been handed down. The two’ cases were tried together as one in the lower court. The result must be the same in each. The assignment of error is overruled and the order of the court awarding a new. trial is affirmed.  