USA 24

Nick Reiner seeks trust fund for defense—blocked for now

Nick Reiner, charged with the murder of his parents, is asking for access to a $1.5 million trust set to distribute payments at ages 30 and 35. His lawyers say the money should be released under the trust’s terms, while the current trustee has cited concerns a

Nick Reiner walked into court and pleaded not guilty to the charges that he murdered his parents, Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner—then turned immediately to a more practical question: whether he can get access to a trust fund that could help pay for his defense.

Reiner, 32, is incarcerated and facing a first-degree murder trial after he was accused of fatally stabbing his parents in December. On Monday. June 8. he filed a petition seeking money from a trust established for him. with the case hinging on details of the trust and a California law that can bar inheritance by someone convicted of killing the person.

The stakes aren’t just legal theory. The petition says the funds are needed for his legal counsel and “basic necessities while incarcerated,” and he argues the trust is separate from the “larger Reiner family trust” and is intended “for his individual benefit.”

Under the terms of the trust described in court filings. Reiner was supposed to receive half of the money when he turned 30 and the remainder when he turns 35. Reiner says in his court documents that the first payment was never distributed. Estate attorney Sean Weissbart. who is not affiliated with the parties or the case. said that if the trust provisions are read as written. the 50% share that vested around age 30 “should have been distributed.”.

“Weissbart says. “When Nick turned age 30, that was about two years before [his arrest], and so that 50% of the trust really vested and should have been distributed to him.”

The trustee. however. has continued to deny access. according to Reiner’s petition. citing alleged “concerns” about his so-called competence to “manage a trust.” Reiner’s lawyers argue the distribution dates are mandatory and that “the trustee’s subjective views” aren’t valid reasons to withhold the money.

Weissbart said the arrangement may also include “hold back provisions. ” which he said allow the trustee to use discretion “if there are certain extenuating circumstances” to deny distribution until “those issues may have resolved.” Still. he emphasized that trustees generally control decisions under the trust’s terms—meaning Rob and Michele Reiner. while alive. would not necessarily have had the power to make the call themselves.

The timeline becomes even sharper when attention turns to age 35. If Reiner is ultimately convicted. Weissbart said California’s Slayer Statute—prohibiting a beneficiary from inheriting from someone they are convicted of killing or were proven to have killed—could bar the later payment. In that scenario, the trust and related estate would be handled as if Reiner had died before his parents.

“The Slayer Statute is absolute. It doesn’t give you a potential entitlement for certain reasons” such as a legal defense, Weissbart said. “It cuts you off completely from any type of inheritance if you killed the person.”

If convicted. Weissbart said Reiner would be prohibited from obtaining what he was set to receive at age 35 because anything he would have received after his parents died becomes inheritance under the statute. He added that Reiner would be “treated as having predeceased his parents. ” and the remainder of the trust and the estate in its entirety would be distributed “as if Nick was not alive at the time of Rob and Michele’s death.”.

That legal framework lands in the middle of a case that has already pulled in high-profile names from Hollywood and the criminal defense world. The deaths of Rob and Michele Reiner—who were married for 36 years—sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry. Rob Reiner’s legacy has been remembered by major figures including Martin Scorsese and Conan O’Brien; at the Oscars in March. Billy Crystal called Rob Reiner a “best friend” in a tribute speech.

image

Alongside Nick Reiner. the couple’s family includes son Jake Reiner and daughter Romy Reiner. as well as Rob Reiner’s adopted daughter Tracy Reiner. In April. Jake Reiner posted an emotional essay on Substack titled “Mom and Dad. ” saying the deaths were “too devastating to comprehend.” He wrote that “we lost more than half our family that night. ” and addressed his brother’s alleged role in their deaths. calling it “almost too impossible to process.”.

Nick Reiner’s petition centers on what he says he needs to keep his defense moving while he remains in custody. It says he wants to pay for his legal counsel and “basic necessities while incarcerated. ” and that the trust is for his individual benefit. The petition also says Reiner hopes to rehire celebrity defense attorney Alan Jackson. who stepped down in January because of “circumstances beyond his control.”.

Jackson’s declaration describes how he says he was removed from the case despite earlier plans. He wrote that Reiner’s siblings initially agreed to “act as third-party payors” to retain and fund his representation. but in late December. Jackson said the family representative told him that none of the anticipated third-party funding would be provided.

Jackson stated that if the trust funds become available, his “firm stands ready, willing, and able to resume representation of Mr. Reiner.”

Seth Zuckerman. a celebrity criminal defense attorney and former New York City prosecutor. said the dispute could become expensive quickly—especially if Reiner enters a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. Zuckerman suggested that access to the trust could be aimed not just at hiring counsel, but at funding experts.

“[Reiner] is likely trying to access these funds not only to pay for his attorney. but also for that defense. because hiring an expert on his mental state would probably be very important. ” Zuckerman said. “I suspect it’s to pay for a very well qualified expert who would be able to testify that he was legally insane at the time of the offense. so therefore he is not criminally responsible.”.

image

Reiner reportedly was diagnosed with schizophrenia years ago and was being treated for a serious psychiatric disorder at the time of the crime. according to NBC News. The New York Times later reported that Reiner was in a mental health conservatorship from 2020 until 2021. citing confirmation from a clerk for the Los Angeles Superior Court.

To qualify for an insanity plea, Zuckerman said defense teams would need to show “that he suffered from a mental disease or defect, and that due to that condition he was incapable of understanding the nature and quality of his act, and couldn’t distinguish right from wrong.”

Reiner has also spoken publicly about addiction. In a 2016 interview with People, he said he went to rehab 17 times beginning at age 15. He told the outlet that at one point he became homeless after he refused to return to treatment. In 2015. he and his father. Rob Reiner. worked together on a romantic drama titled “Being Charlie. ” loosely inspired by Nick Reiner’s own battle with addiction.

If Reiner does not succeed in getting access to the trust, he will still have a public defender, who already represents him. But Zuckerman said the options could narrow for experts and other resources because experts and attorneys often take different rates depending on who is paying.

“If you want the most experienced and you can handle it, both for experts and the attorneys, it’s going to cost you,” Zuckerman said.

For now. the petition keeps circling back to two questions that are tightly linked: whether the trust’s terms require payment now that he has reached the first milestone at age 30. and whether California’s Slayer Statute would prevent any later inheritance if he is convicted. In Reiner’s case. the fight isn’t only about whether a defense can be built—it’s about when the money can legally reach the person accused of the crime.

Nick Reiner Rob Reiner Michele Singer Reiner trust fund legal defense Alan Jackson California Slayer Statute first-degree murder trial mental health schizophrenia public defender estate trustee

4 Comments

  1. I don’t get it. If he pleaded not guilty then why not just let him have the money? Sounds like they’re punishing him before anything is proven.

  2. Wait, the trustee blocked it because he “walked into court”? That’s such a weird reason. Like, you can’t access money because of courtroom vibes? Also the parents’ names are Rob and Michele, so are they the ones who made the trust or what? This article lost me.

  3. Honestly this seems like one of those loophole things. If California law can bar inheritance for killing someone, then why is anyone even considering paying for his defense from the trust? But at the same time, “basic necessities” in jail?? I’m sure the state covers that. Idk, it feels like both sides are just arguing over paper while he’s sitting there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Are you human? Please solve:Captcha


Secret Link

Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, null given in /home/misryoum/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wp-defender/src/component/class-network-cron-manager.php on line 216