Would Fraud In Execution or Inducement Vitiate Release and Is Release Effective If Allegations of Fraud Are Absent
In McCormick v. McCormick, 118 Ill. App. 3d 455, 466, 455 N.E.2d 103, 112, 74 Ill. Dec. 73 (1983), the instrument released all claims arising out of the trustee's management of the trust.
At the time the release was signed the fiduciary relationship no longer existed as a matter of law. McCormick, 118 Ill. App. 3d at 466, 455 N.E.2d at 113, citing Collins, 110 Ill. App. 3d 1026, 443 N.E.2d 277, 66 Ill. Dec. 594.
However, we suggest that defendant interprets the holding of McCormick too broadly.
A careful reading of McCormick reflects that we held merely that where a release follows a fiduciary's resignation, there is no presumption of fraud, which is normally applied to fiduciaries. McCormick, 118 Ill. App. 3d at 466, 455 N.E.2d at 112.
Nonetheless, we noted in McCormick that fraud in the execution or fraud in the inducement would vitiate the release (McCormick, 118 Ill. App. 3d at 466, 455 N.E.2d at 112); however, the plaintiff in McCormick did not allege facts to establish these defenses (McCormick, 118 Ill. App. 3d at 466, 455 N.E.2d at 112).
Thus, because allegations of fraud were absent, the release was effective.