ILCS » Chapter 755 · Act 45
Illinois Compiled Statutes

755 ILCS 45/2-9 (2026)

Preservation of estate plan and trusts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(755 ILCS 45/2-9) (from Ch. 110 1/2, par. 802-9)
    Sec. 2-9. Preservation of estate plan and trusts. In exercising powers granted under the agency, including powers of amendment or revocation and powers to expend or withdraw property passing by trust, contract or beneficiary designation at the principal's death (such as, without limitation, specifically bequeathed property, joint accounts, life insurance, trusts and retirement plans), the agent shall take the principal's estate plan into account insofar as it is known to the agent and shall attempt to preserve the plan, but the agent shall not be liable to any plan beneficiary under this Section unless the agent acts in bad faith. An agent may not revoke or amend a trust revocable or amendable by the principal or require the trustee of any trust for the benefit of the principal to pay income or principal to the agent without specific authority and specific reference to the trust in the agency. The agent shall have access to and the right to copy (but not to hold) the principal's will, trusts and other personal papers and records to the extent the agent deems relevant for purposes of this Section. This Section shall not apply to any Totten Trust, Payable on Death Account, or comparable trust account arrangement where the terms of such trust are contained entirely on the financial institution's signature card insofar as an agent acting under a power of attorney executed in accordance with this Act shall be permitted to withdraw income or principal from such account if the power of attorney grants the agent authority to conduct financial institution transactions on the principal's behalf and the agent's authority to access such account is not expressly limited or withheld in the agency.
(Source: P.A. 94-938, eff. 1-1-07.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2023 · leading case: Centure Bank v. Voga, 2017 IL App (2d) 160690 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Centure Bank v. Voga, 2017 IL App (2d) 160690 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “Count X alleged that the POA did not specifically mention the Trust as an instrument that Linda could modify, as -3- 2017 IL App (2d) 160690 required by section 2-9 of the Act (755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2006)). Lyle further alleged in count X that the POA, as “a common law power of…”
Hoopingarner v. Stenzel, 768 N.E.2d 772 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 2× “755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2000). Section 2-9 of the Act clearly establishes that an agent will only be liable if the agent acts in bad faith.”
Centure Bank v. Voga, 2017 IL App (2d) 160690 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “Count X alleged that the POA did not specifically mention the Trust as an instrument that Linda could modify, as required by section 2-9 of the Act (755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2006)). Lyle further alleged in count X that the POA, as “a common law power of attorney,” expired prior to…”
Centrue Bank v. Voga, 2020 IL App (2d) 190108 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “1 Count X argued that the Amendment was void because the Power of Attorney, which purportedly authorized the Amendment, did not specifically name the Trust, as required by section 2-9 of the Illinois Power of Attorney Act (Act) (755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2006)). Neither Larry,…”
Centrue Bank v. Voga, 2020 IL App (2d) 190108 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “1 Count X argued that the Amendment was void because the Power of Attorney, which purportedly authorized the Amendment, did not specifically name the Trust, as required by section 2-9 of the Illinois Power of Attorney Act (Act) (755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2006)). Neither Larry,…”
Centrue Bank v. Voga, 2023 IL App (2d) 220088-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “755 ILCS 45/2-9 (West 2006); Id., ¶ 54. Consequently, we reversed the trial court’s dismissal of count V of the amended countercomplaint and vacated the trial court’s order granting partial summary judgment in Linda’s favor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.