Nick Reiner is continuing to fight for money he believes he’s owed… and his former lawyer is coming to his defense.
As Perezcious readers know, Nick has been accused of killing his parents, Rob and Michele Reiner, last December. While he’s been awaiting trial behind bars, he was forced to let go of his original attorney, Alan Jackson, for Public Defender Kimberly Greene due to lack of funding. Now, Nick is fighting to secure trust fund money he says he was owed years ago — but the current trustees of the trust fund and California law could stand in his way.
Related: From Drugs To Murder: Hollywood’s Darkest Moments
Here’s the deal. The 32-year-old filed a lengthy petition in June fighting for access to trust fund money, which was in an account his parents set up for him after his birth in 1993. He says it’s worth over $1.5 million, and he was eligible to receive half of the trust when he turned 30 — at least $558,000 — well before his parents’ deaths. He didn’t receive the money at the time, and now he wants it to help pay for his legal battle and “basic necessities” in jail. But so far he’s had no luck getting the money.
Per court papers viewed by People, the previous and incoming fiduciaries overseeing the trust, Paul Kanin and Jodi Pais Montgomery, respectively, opposed the request in their own filing earlier this month, arguing a Cali law known as the “slayer statute” protects the money from going to Nick at this time. That law blocks someone from inheriting money or property from someone they “feloniously and intentionally” kill.
Simply put, the trustees want the court to block Nick from accessing the money “until the Court resolves whether” the rule should affect Nick’s entitlement. The filing states:
“Nick’s sense of 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.”
In a previous court filing also obtained by the outlet, a lawyer for Montgomery, Lauriann Wright, said:
“California has enacted no exception permitting a killer’s inheritance to be used for criminal-defense costs.”
Per Wright, if the money is not allowed to go to Nick, it will be passed to the late couple’s other two children, Jake and Romy. The lawyer added that her client has a fiduciary responsibility to Jake and Romy. Acknowledging that Nick is currently only accused of the killings, she pointed out that giving him the money at this time would be “irreversible.”
Nick, however, has argued that he “did not give [his] consent to any Trustee of [his] Trust to withhold, defer, or retain [his] Age-30 Distribution indefinitely as ‘property of the Trust.’” He explained:
“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 wants the money released to him as well as accrued interest and income. The trustee, meanwhile, claims he consented to leaving the money in the fund, which should defeat his claim of needing interest and income that has accrued.
Nick’s attorney Anita P. Wu also told The Times:
“The slayer statute requires a determination, not a mere accusation. Nick is presumed innocent and has been convicted of nothing.”
During a Monday court hearing over this matter, per Page Six, it was revealed that the Being Charlie screenwriter has already paid $200,000 in legal bills associated with the trust and murder cases. He also gets $300 a month from the trust to use in the prison commissary at this time. As for whether he’s owed the full trust fund money he’s after, that’s to be determined. The judge moved the hearing to October 23 to give more time to review arguments.
Nick was not present for the meeting, but his ex-lawyer Alan Jackson actually showed up and spoke to press. He said:
“The main thing that to take away from today’s hearing and moving forward is that Nick Reiner is very much entitled to his own money, his own funds, and that’s what this process is about. He has made a determination that he wants to be able to use his funds that are in his trust account to decide on his criminal counsel.”
A lot is still up in this air, but whether or not Nick receives this money could transform his case!
Thoughts? Do U think the “Slayer Statute” should apply in this case?