Nick Reiner Trust Hearing Continued to October

Nick Reiner’s attorneys urged a Los Angeles probate court on August 17 to help resolve his access to trust assets for his criminal defense, ABC News and Variety reported. The money could affect his ability to hire private counsel while he faces state murder charges, and the dispute remains unresolved before further proceedings in October.

Contents

Why the trust money matters
What happened at the hearing
How California’s inheritance law works
The separate criminal case
Sources

Key Facts

California probate court: ABC News reported that Judge Ruben Garcia scheduled another hearing for October 23 without deciding whether Reiner may receive the disputed assets.
Trust dispute: Variety reported that the trustee had approved limited expenses but opposed a larger distribution.
Separate criminal case: Reiner pleaded not guilty to the indictment, and the charges remain allegations.

Why the trust money matters

The Associated Press reported that Reiner’s June petition alleged that the trust held at least $1.5 million and sought immediate access to the money for his defense. The reported amount and requested distribution are allegations in the petition, not judicial findings.

Reiner currently has an appointed public defender in the criminal case, according to ABC News. Access to the trust therefore could affect whether he can retain private counsel, but it would not change the charges or decide his guilt.

What happened at the hearing

ABC News reported that probate attorney Anita Wu asked the court to move the parties toward private mediation. Trustee-side attorneys said they were willing to mediate, according to ABC News.

Judge Garcia scheduled another hearing for October 23, ABC News and Variety reported. The reports describe a continuation of the dispute, not an order granting or permanently denying access to the money.

Variety reported that the trustee had authorized limited payments for earlier legal bills and his jail commissary account. The publication also reported that the trustee opposed a larger distribution and cited the possible application of California’s inheritance restrictions.

Variety identified Reiner’s siblings, Jake and Romy Reiner, as contingent beneficiaries whose interests the trustee said must be considered. Neither sibling’s position on the requested distribution is established in the approved evidence.

How California’s inheritance law works

California Probate Code Section 250 bars a person who feloniously and intentionally kills a decedent from receiving benefits under the decedent’s will. It also covers a trust created by or for the decedent’s benefit, or in which the decedent had an interest. That rule does not itself establish that Reiner committed a killing or that the disputed trust assets fall within the statute.

A final conviction is conclusive under Section 254, but a conviction is not the only possible route to a probate determination. Without a final conviction, a probate court may decide under a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard whether a killing was felonious and intentional.

The party seeking that determination carries the burden of proof. No such determination was reported from the August 17 hearing.

The separate criminal case

A Los Angeles County grand jury returned an indictment on July 20 charging Reiner with two murder counts and related special-circumstance allegations. The indictment was unsealed on August 12, when Reiner pleaded not guilty.

An indictment states accusations; it is not a finding of guilt. Reiner is presumed innocent unless prosecutors prove the charges in court.

The criminal pretrial hearing is scheduled for September 15, while the next reported probate hearing is October 23. The criminal prosecution and the trust dispute remain separate proceedings with different issues and standards.

Readers seeking broader context about the accusations can review TheFirstFile’s guide to California murder charges.