
    Gray v. The Meadville & Cambridge Springs Street Railway Company, Appellant.
    Argued April 27, 1908.
    Appeals, Nos. 285, 301 and 302, Jan. T., 1907, by defendant, from judgments of C. P. Crawford Co., Feb. T., 1906, Nos. 90, 91 and 92, on verdicts for plaintiffs in cases of Henry Noel v. The Meadville & Cambridge Springs Street Railway Company, Mary Hickernell, a minor, by her father, Isaac Hickernell and Isaac Hickernell v. The Meadville and Cambridge Springs Street Railway Company and Somner Gray v. The Meadville and Cambridge Springs Street Railway compan}r.
    Before Fell. Brown, Mestrezat, Potter and Elkin, JJ.
    Reversed.
    
      May 18, 1908 :
   Per Curiam,

These eases arose out of the same accident as the case of Beckman v. Railway Co., 219 Pa. 26, and are governed by.it. .For the reasons there stated the judgment in each case.is re-„ versed and it is directed' that judgment be entered for the defendant in each non obstante veredicto.  