The Slayer's Law more commonly called a “slayer statute,” has become a central issue in the legal battle surrounding Nick Reiner, who is accused of murdering his parents, filmmaker Rob Reiner and photographer Michele Singer Reiner.

Reiner, 32, is seeking access to money held in a family trust to help pay for his criminal defense.

Bitcoin Twins See Bitcoin’s $65,000 Level as a New Buying Opportunity - USA Herald 

Nick Reiner Can't Fund an Attorney due to Slayer's Law

A California trustee has blocked the request under the state’s law preventing people accused of intentionally killing a benefactor from financially benefiting from that person’s death.

The dispute comes as Reiner’s criminal case moves toward trial. A Los Angeles grand jury indicted him in July on two counts of first-degree murder, with special-circumstance allegations involving multiple murders and lying in wait.

The indictment was unsealed Aug. 12. Reiner has pleaded not guilty and remains in custody without bail.

The trust was established by Rob and Michele Reiner for their children. Reiner has argued that he became entitled to receive a portion of the money after turning 30 and wants to use funds from the trust to finance his legal defense.

Trust Fund Becomes Legal Battleground

Reports have put the trust's value at roughly $1.5 million to $1.6 million, with Reiner seeking access to more than $500,000 that he says is owed to him. His former attorney, Alan Jackson, has argued that Reiner should be able to use money that was already designated for him.

The trustee's position is that California's slayer statute prevents Reiner from receiving benefits created by his parents if he is ultimately found responsible for their deaths. The trustee has also argued that releasing the money before the criminal case is resolved could create an irreversible situation if Reiner is later convicted.

The dispute is particularly unusual because Reiner has not been convicted. His attorneys contend that he remains presumed innocent and that the statute should not be used to deprive him of access to his own trust assets before a finding of guilt.

The probate dispute is expected to continue, with a hearing scheduled for Oct. 23.

What Is the Slayers Law?

The term “Slayers Law” generally refers to statutes that prevent a person from profiting from intentionally killing someone whose death would otherwise provide an inheritance or other financial benefit.

California's rules are designed around a straightforward legal principle: A person should not be able to benefit financially from intentionally and unlawfully causing another person's death.

The statute can affect more than a traditional will. Depending on the circumstances, the rules can apply to property interests, trusts, insurance proceeds and other benefits connected to the deceased person.

The law also addresses situations in which a person who allegedly caused a death would otherwise inherit through the victim's estate. In California, the statutory framework is found in the state's Probate Code.

The key legal question in Reiner's case is not simply whether the slayer statute exists. It is whether and how the statute applies while a criminal prosecution remains unresolved.

That distinction is at the heart of the dispute between Reiner's lawyers and the trustee.

Other Cases Have Shaped Slayer Statutes

Slayer laws have been tested in numerous inheritance and property disputes involving alleged or proven killers.

California courts have addressed the issue in cases involving spouses, joint property and life-insurance benefits. In Johansen v. Pelton, a 1970 California appellate decision involving a murder-suicide, the court examined how property should be treated when one joint tenant unlawfully kills another. The court discussed the use of a constructive trust to prevent the surviving slayer from improperly benefiting from the victim's property.

Another California case, Castiglioni v. Del Pozo, examined earlier slayer cases and discussed the principle that a person who intentionally and unlawfully causes the death of a joint tenant should not simply obtain the deceased person's property because of the killing. The decision referenced earlier cases including Saltares v. Kristovich and Johansen v. Pelton.

California courts have also applied the underlying principle to insurance disputes. In State Farm Life Insurance Co. v. Miles, the court discussed circumstances involving a spouse who killed the insured and whether the killer could manipulate beneficiary designations to receive an indirect financial benefit. The court emphasized the broader principle that a person should not profit from his or her own wrongful conduct.

These cases illustrate why slayer's law and other statutes can become complicated.

Reiner Case Moves Toward Trial

The trust dispute is unfolding alongside a significant development in the criminal case.

Prosecutors allege that Reiner killed his parents at their Brentwood home on Dec. 14, 2025. Rob Reiner, 78, and Michele Reiner, 70, were found dead with multiple sharp-force injuries.

The grand jury indictment added a special circumstance allegation that the murders were committed by lying in wait. It also alleges multiple murders and that Reiner personally used a dangerous and deadly weapon, identified by prosecutors as a knife.

Those allegations could expose him to life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty if he is convicted and prosecutors pursue the maximum punishment.

Slayer's Law Dispute Continues in Probate Court

Reiner has pleaded not guilty and remains legally presumed innocent unless and until prosecutors prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

His next major criminal court date is scheduled for Sept. 15.

The separate trust dispute will also continue.

Judge Ruben Garcia set a probate court hearing for October 23.

Nick Reiner was initially represented in the criminal case by high-profile attorney Alan Jackson, who dropped out of the case in January when Nick Reiner ​was unable to pay ​his own counsel.

Jackson ⁠now is helping the probate attorneys who are seeking access to the trust on Reiner's behalf.

Slayer's Law Issues Result in Legal Battle

The issue is not always a simple question of whether someone receives an inheritance. Courts may have to determine what happens to jointly owned property, insurance proceeds, trusts and the interests of other heirs.

For now, the Slayer's Law issue leaves Reiner facing two separate legal battles: one over his freedom and another over whether he can access money his parents established for him.

The outcome of the criminal case could ultimately determine the long-term inheritance question, but the probate dispute raises difficult issues before trial.

How can courts protect the principle that a person cannot profit from a killing? And also respect the constitutional presumption of innocence.

Related Resources

• Reuters: Nick Reiner Trust Fund Dispute
• Reuters: Nick Reiner Grand Jury Indictment
• California Legislative Information — Probate Code
• Johansen v. Pelton — California Slayer Case
• State Farm Life Insurance Co. v. Miles