Case Summary

• Legacy in Limbo
  The late rapper’s multimillion-dollar estate—valued at $11 million and growing—is at the center of a contentious legal dispute involving his daughter Emani’s inheritance.
• Family Ties or Legal Lines?
  Nipsey’s brother Sam plays a vital role in Emani’s life—one the court appears to respect—but legal wrangling over guardianship and attorney compensation continues to cloud the estate proceedings.
• A Mother’s Claim, a Guardian’s Objection
  Court-appointed counsel for Emani insists her inheritance should not be tapped to cover fees for her mother’s legal team, calling the move inequitable and adversarial.

By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald

[CALIFORNIA] - The fight over Nipsey Hussle’s 16-year-old daughter, Emani Asghedom, has now reached a new level of intensity, with court filings revealing bitter disputes over legal fees and the use of her inheritance to fund opposing counsel.

At the heart of the legal battle is a critical question with vast implications for probate law, family custody arrangements, and minor’s estate protections: Should a child’s inheritance be used to pay legal fees for someone previously opposed to her in court?

Since Nipsey Hussle’s tragic murder in 2019, his family—particularly his brother Samiel “Blacc Sam” Asghedom—has played an active role in safeguarding the legacy he left behind, including the welfare of his daughter Emani. The court, recognizing Sam’s pivotal role in Emani’s life, entrusted guardianship of the minor to Nipsey’s family, with Sam, their sister Samantha, and their mother Angelique Smith stepping forward to ensure Emani’s upbringing and protection.

Multiple sources, including previous court records, have affirmed the close and loving relationship Sam shared with Nipsey. “Sam is the man Nipsey would’ve wanted in his daughter’s life,” a legal analyst familiar with the probate case told USA Herald. “The court seems to honor that.”

Estate Worth Millions—and Growing

Nipsey Hussle (born Ermias Asghedom) died intestate, meaning he left no will. Under California probate law, his estate—valued at an estimated $11 million in 2019 and growing thanks to business ventures, music royalties, and posthumous licensing deals—was inherited solely by his children: Emani and her younger half-brother Kross, whose mother is actress Lauren London.

Under California Probate Code §§ 16040–16061, fiduciaries—including guardians—owe strict duties to act in the best interests of the estate’s minor beneficiaries. The latest legal challenge raises serious concerns over whether those duties are being honored.

The Objection to Legal Fees

In an April 22 filing, William Spiller, the court-appointed lawyer for Emani, strongly objected to a request that attorney Larry Lewellyn—representing Emani’s biological mother, Tanisha Foster—be paid from the teen’s estate.

Spiller argued that Lewellyn’s legal position had been “adversarial” to the minor and that paying his fees from the estate would be “neither fair nor equitable.” He emphasized that such payments could drain the resources Emani is entitled to as part of her father’s legacy.

“The minor child’s estate and/or inheritance will likely be utilized to pay her attorneys,” Spiller warned, pointing to possible future obligations that may be compromised by the proposed fee payout.

Lewellyn, in contrast, maintains that his client’s efforts—particularly her motion to terminate the guardianship—were in Emani’s best interest.

But Spiller’s filing may carry weight. California courts routinely apply the “reasonable and necessary” standard under Cal. Prob. Code § 10811 when evaluating attorney fee awards from a minor’s estate. If a legal service was not in furtherance of the child’s best interest, courts are unlikely to permit reimbursement.

A Mother’s Battle

Tanisha Foster has long sought to regain custody of her daughter, accusing Nipsey’s family of using their “financial position and influence” to marginalize her. In court filings, her attorneys have claimed the family reduced Tanisha’s visitation and withheld financial assistance.

According to The Blast, Tanisha initially consented to the guardianship based on verbal assurances that Emani would maintain family connections and a familiar lifestyle. But that trust appears to have eroded, leading to her legal campaign to reverse the guardianship.

In her own declaration, Tanisha argued that Emani no longer required guardianship and that her attempts to resume custody have been met with resistance and exclusion.

Still, guardianship law in California favors continuity and stability. Under Probate Code § 1601, a guardianship may only be terminated when it’s proven no longer necessary or in the child’s best interest.

“The court will weigh the child’s welfare above all else,” said a Los Angeles probate lawyer not affiliated with the case. “Allegations of parental alienation or family infighting must be supported by clear evidence.”

Inheritance at Risk?

With the estate continuing to generate income, any mismanagement or questionable disbursement—including to pay attorneys—could threaten Emani’s future security. Sam and Nipsey’s family have consistently acted as protectors of Emani’s financial and emotional well-being, a position echoed by the court’s initial guardianship ruling.

Probate and estate courts often emphasize that minors must be shielded from legal entanglements that could dilute their rightful inheritance. This principle is codified in Cal. Prob. Code § 1513, which mandates independent counsel to represent the child’s best interests in contested guardianship or estate matters.

So far, the court appears to be heeding that mandate. But until the judge rules on whether attorney Lewellyn’s fees may be deducted from Emani’s inheritance, this case remains in flux.

For more on how courts handle celebrity estates and minor beneficiaries, join me on Patreon.

Read more articles by Samuel A. Lopez

Explore More
🔗 Follow us on X @RealUSAHerald
🔗 USA Herald Homepage