Richard B. Jacobson & Associates, LLC | Richard B. Jacobson
Any answer to this question must be highly fact-dependent. On the one hand, a release could have much the same effect as the revocation. It depends upon lots of history which you have not provided. As to the revocation, do you mean that was held to be 'illegal,' or simply 'unenforceable?'
Answer Applies to: Wisconsin
Law Offices of George H. Shers | George H. Shers
I do not understand the circumstances; you need to give more details. ?If the contract was initially revoked, why would there be a release? If the contract is held to be binding, there would only be a release if the parties agree not to fulfill the contract.
Answer Applies to: California
Adler Law Group, LLC | Lawrence Adler
The question needs more information. But if you are saying the contract is now valid because the revocation is not legal, the release of the same contract could be valid if part of a deal to end the contract. It must have been based on agreement of Both parties.
Answer Applies to: Connecticut
Musilli Brennan Associates PLLC | John F Brennan
A contract revocation is generally one indicia of a breach, either in fact or in anticipation, of the contract itself. It gives rise to a dispute which a later entered into release resolves. They are two extremely different areas of jurisprudence.
Answer Applies to: Michigan