Case Name: Abraham Cornogg against Isaac Abraham and Jane his wife, Daniel Cornogg and George George, Executors of Daniel Cornogg
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1791-05
Citations: 1 Yeates 18
Docket Number: 
Parties: Abraham Cornogg against Isaac Abraham and Jane his wife, Daniel Cornogg and George George, Executors of Daniel Cornogg.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Yeates)
Volume: 1
Pages: 18–18

Head Matter:
Abraham Cornogg against Isaac Abraham and Jane his wife, Daniel Cornogg and George George, Executors of Daniel Cornogg.
A trial will not be ordered on, where a party has not prepared, expecting a compromise from the declarations of his adversary ; and the costs in such case ordered to continue on the remanet.
Messrs. Eewis and Sergeant pro quer.
Messrs. Wilcocks and Thomas Ross i>ro def.

Opinion:
This cause came before the court under a rule on the plaintiff to bring on his cause to trial at this time, or that a non-suit should be entered. A motion was made to put off the action on the plaintiff's affidavit, that in a conversation which took place between him and his brother, the acting executor, about four weeks before, he was induced to believe that an amicable settlement would be effected by the intervention of mutual friends; and that his brother proposed to cal-1 on him for that purpose, that they might go together to Philadelphia, and that in consequence of this expectation, he had made no preparations for trial. The defendants called *iq-| two witnesses, who were present * during the whole of I the conversation referred to, who gave a different account of that conversation, and declared that they did not hear the particular declarations sworn to by the plaintiff.
The court, on consideration, postponed the cause, the plaintiff having sworn positively to his account of the transad ion, and though he might have misconceived the expressions of his brother, his ideas of the whole had prevented him from coming prepared for trial.
The defendants then moved for a rule that the plaintiff should pay the costs of the term, but this was denied by the court, who directed that the same should, und.er the peculiar circumstances of the case, continue on the remanet.