Nick Reiner has been denied access to a $1.5 million trust fund set up by his late parents, Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, as he awaits trial for their murders.
Nick, 32, initially sought to access his share of the trust in June, arguing that he should have received half of that sum when he turned 30 in September 2023. The trust was established by Rob and Michele for their son upon his birth in 1993.
Both Nick and the trustees have filed new paperwork with a California Superior Court in recent days as he continues to fight for a payout, according to documents obtained by Us. In early August, lawyers for Nick’s previous and current trustee — Paul Kanin and Jodi Pais Montgomery — sought to block him from receiving any money from the trust due to California’s “Slayer Statute.” (The New York Times was the first to report the news.)
The “Slayer Statute” law states that “a person who feloniously and intentionally kills the decedent is not entitled” to any financial assets or property from the person or people they killed.
Montgomery’s lawyers stressed that Nick’s “urgency is real, but it did not arise in a vacuum.”
“It arises from the deaths of his parents, the very settlors of the Trust at issue, and Nick is presently accused of causing those deaths,” the trustee’s lawyers argued. “While Nick is presumed innocent of that accusation (and nothing in this Response and Objection should be read to suggest otherwise), no one, not this Court, nor the parties, knows how the criminal proceedings against Nick will ultimately resolve.”
Per her lawyers, Montgomery is “bound by the same fiduciary obligations as any trustee” to “reasonably administer the trust by its terms and to preserve and protect the trust property.”
The trustee stated that “no distribution [of money] should be made until the Court resolves whether” the “Slayer Statute” applies in this instance since any such payout would be “irreversible.” (Nick has pleaded not guilty to killing his parents, Rob and Michele.)
“Nick’s status as an incarcerated beneficiary does not convert a discretionary support standard into an on-demand entitlement,” as stated in the docs.
Lawyers argue that Nick’s claim fails because his needs are being met while he’s behind bars, including with legal representation by a public defender, and he’s not entitled to private counsel paid for by the trust.
“Nick is incarcerated and his basic needs — housing, food, medical care — are being met by the State. He is represented in the underlying criminal matter by the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office, appointed counsel to whom Nick has a right and who continues to represent him.
“To the extent Nick’s damages theory rests on the unavailability of private counsel of his choosing, that theory fails as a matter of law: a criminal defendant has no entitlement to the specific private counsel of his choice at the trust’s expense.
“Nick cannot manufacture damages out of a preference for retained rather than appointed counsel where his fundamental needs, including the right to legal representation, are indisputably being met.”
If Nick is denied access to the trust, his siblings, Romy Reiner and Jake Reiner, would become “contingent remainder beneficiaries,” per the trustee.
In his own declaration to the court, Nick acknowledged that he allowed the trustee to hold off distributing his share of the trust at age 30 “until such time as [I] desire[d] to receive distribution.”
“I did not give my consent to any Trustee of my Trust to withhold, defer, or retain my Age-30 Distribution indefinitely as ‘property of the Trust,’” he countered. “I did not ask or authorize my mother to give such consent on my behalf, and I do not recall signing or being asked to sign any document giving that consent.”
Reiner is now seeking one-half of the total $1.5 million in his trust, plus interest, to be released immediately so he can pay legal fees ahead of his double murder trial, as well as add money to his jail commissary. (Nick is being held at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility in Los Angeles as he awaits trial.)
“I have never understood anything I did (or did not do) to constitute giving the Trustee my consent to indefinitely withhold my Age-30 Distribution from me and retain it as property of the Trust even after I have asked for it, and it was not my intention to consent to that,” he wrote. “As I have stated in my Petition and other documents, I would like for my money to be released and I ‘desire to receive’ it, with the accrued interest and income.”
A spokesperson for the trust declined to comment when reached by Us.
Nick’s attorney, Anita P. Wu, told The New York Times, “The ‘Slayer Statute’ requires a determination, not a mere accusation. Nick is presumed innocent and has been convicted of nothing.”
On Wednesday, August 12, Nick was formally indicted on first-degree murder charges for allegedly killing his parents on December 14, 2025. He pleaded not guilty to the two murder charges, as well as two counts of murder with the special circumstance allegations of multiple murders and murder by means of lying in wait once the indictment was unsealed.
“This was a profound betrayal by someone who was loved and trusted by the very people he is accused of killing,” Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan J. Hochman said in a statement. “The indictment unsealed today also adds a special circumstance allegation that the defendant committed the murders by means of lying in wait. We hope that by having a grand jury return an indictment in this case, it will bring us one step closer to a trial and achieving justice.”
Us reached out to Nick’s attorney for comment on the legal fight over his trust.
