Nick Reiner wants access to a $1.5 million trust fund his late parents, Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, set up for him — while awaiting trial for their deaths.
Nick was arrested in December 2025 for the alleged murders of Rob and Michele, pleading not guilty to the charges. Ahead of Nick’s trial, he requested funds from the estate left behind by his parents that challenge a California statute designed to keep killers from cashing in on their victims.
Scroll down to learn more about the court request:
The Basics of Nick Reiner’s Trust Fund Petition
According to court documents obtained by Us Weekly, Rob and Michele established a “smaller, separate trust for [Nick’s] individual benefit” before their deaths. Under the terms, Nick was supposed to receive half of the fund “outright” when he turned 30, with the remaining balance distributed when he turned 35.
Nick, who turned 32 in September 2025, alleges he never received that first installment and does not know the full value of the trust — only that it exceeds $1.5 million.
Nick’s petition claims that there have been “months of repeated inquiries” to the current trustee, who has responded with what the filing describes as “a shifting series of excuses and justifications,” including concerns about Nick’s “competence” to manage the money. Nick’s team further argues the trustee cannot legally withhold the funds because the trust is “irrevocable” and there has been “no judicial declaration that Nick is incompetent.”
“Nick loved his parents, and he is devastated by their deaths,” the probate petition reads. “But the facts about what did and did not happen to them are not at issue in this Trust litigation.”
Why Nick Reiner Says He Needs the Money Now
The petition makes it clear that Nick wants to use the fund to pay for his criminal defense and deposit money into his commissary account.
“The stakes for Nick could not be higher,” the filing states, alleging that he cannot pay for “basic necessities while incarcerated” and cannot afford legal counsel.
Nick was previously represented by Alan Jackson, who withdrew from the case in January 2026 after, court documents claim, “the anticipated funding did not materialize” from the trust. He is now represented by a public defender.
Why Nick Reiner’s Case Is Complicated
The legal wrinkle here is California’s so-called “slayer rule.” Rachael Bennett, a certified family law specialist and senior attorney at Sullivan Law & Associates, broke down the issue on the “Legally Us” podcast.
“This request puts the trustee in a really difficult position, because really the situation is sitting at the intersection of trust law, and then we’ve got the California slayer rule that’s implicated now,” Bennett, who has no ties to Nick’s case, told Us in June 2026. “The slayer rule prevents someone from inheriting from, or just financially profiting, if they intentionally killed the person that they would have otherwise inherited from.”
Nick’s team, meanwhile, is arguing the rule shouldn’t apply because the trust predated the criminal charges.
“Reiner is now arguing that the money was already lawfully his before the criminal charges arose, and so therefore, the slayer statute doesn’t prohibit him from inheriting it,” Bennett said. “This case is really going to test the limits of that slayer rule. It seems intrinsically wrong that Nick Reiner, if he’s convicted of murder, could be given millions of dollars of his own parents’ money to defend himself after brutally murdering them,” Bennett said. “That’s exactly the kind of, what I would call, perverse outcome that the slayer statutes are meant to prevent. … I would say here the fact that this was an already established trust, that’s Reiner’s loophole.”
Nick Reiner’s Competence Comes Into Question
Nick has been candid about past drug abuse and is reportedly diagnosed with schizophrenia. According to Bennett, Nick’s mental health history creates an additional bind in the trust fight.
“The law allows a trustee to withhold trust distributions if the recipient is legally incompetent, which is why Nick Reiner didn’t receive his trust distribution when he turned 30 in 2023 and the trustee is still arguing that it shouldn’t have to release the funds due to him being allegedly incapacitated,” Bennett told Us. “If his criminal defense is not guilty by reason of insanity, he’ll essentially be proving the trustee’s point in the trust case. In other words, if he claims he was so impaired that he couldn’t form any criminal intent, then the trustee might argue, ‘Well, then how can he be competent to control millions of dollars in trust assets?’”
This story was compiled with the help of AI tools and edited by journalists.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.usmagazine.com ’
