The entertainment world and beyond was left reeling on 14 December 2025, when filmmaker Rob Reiner and his wife, photographer Michele Singer Reiner, were found fatally stabbed at their Los Angeles home. Four days later, their son, Nick Reiner, was charged with two counts of first-degree murder. This horrific tragedy has cast a stark legal spotlight on a centuries-old legal doctrine: the 'slayer rule'.
What Exactly Is the 'Slayer Rule' in US Law?
In essence, the slayer rule is a legal principle present in some form across all American states. It is designed to prevent an individual from financially profiting from their own crime. If you are found to have intentionally and feloniously killed someone, you cannot inherit from their estate.
While details vary by jurisdiction, California's statute is typical. It bars a 'slayer' from receiving any property, benefit, or other interest from the victim, whether through a will, a trust, or as a joint tenant. This can extend to life insurance payouts and other jointly held assets. The rule's origins are often traced to an 1889 New York case where a teenager poisoned his grandfather to secure an inheritance.
"The rule exists for a clear public policy reason: you should not be rewarded for committing a horrific act," explains the legal principle. Crucially, most rules, including California's, require the killing to be 'felonious and intentional'. Accidental homicide or manslaughter may not trigger the statute. A formal criminal conviction is not always necessary; a civil court finding of intentional killing can also activate the rule.
High-Profile Precedents: From Menendez to Peterson
The slayer rule has been invoked in several notorious Californian cases. Perhaps the most famous are Lyle and Erik Menendez, convicted in 1996 for murdering their parents in 1989. Despite their parents' multi-million dollar fortune, the brothers were barred from inheriting any of it. Even their 2025 parole denial does not change their disinheritance; release would not restore their inheritance rights.
Another case is that of Scott Peterson, convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, in 2002. California's slayer rule prevented him from collecting the proceeds of her life insurance policy. These examples demonstrate that the rule applies regardless of the size of the estate, though multi-million dollar cases naturally attract more media and public attention.
Potential Complications in the Reiner Case
Applying the rule to Nick Reiner's situation is not yet straightforward. His attorney has already referenced 'complex and serious issues' in the case. Several key factors will determine if the slayer statute comes into play.
First, the outcome of the criminal proceedings is paramount. If Nick Reiner is convicted of first-degree murder, the rule would almost certainly apply. However, if a defence based on insanity, substance abuse, or schizophrenia succeeds, resulting in a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity or a lesser charge like manslaughter, his legal team could argue the killing was not 'felonious and intentional' under the statute.
Second, the Reiner family's estate plans are not public. The couple, with an estimated net worth of $200 million, likely had sophisticated plans involving wills and trusts, especially for valuable intellectual property from Rob's prolific career. If, as is common, their children—Nick, Romy, and Jake, plus Rob's adopted daughter Tracy Reiner—were primary beneficiaries, the slayer rule would redirect Nick's potential share.
Finally, the probate court retains power. Even without a criminal conviction, the court administering the estate can make a separate civil finding that the killing was intentional, thereby barring inheritance. Reports as of mid-December 2025 also indicated Nick's legal bills were being paid by the Reiner family, adding another layer of complexity.
What Happens Next for the Reiner Estate?
It is far too early to know who will ultimately inherit the Reiners' substantial wealth. The couple were known supporters of charitable causes, particularly early childhood development, so charitable bequests are likely part of their plans. The slayer rule, if triggered, would see Nick Reiner treated as having predeceased his parents. His potential share would then likely pass to his siblings or other named contingent beneficiaries.
The case is a grim reminder that this ancient legal doctrine remains a vital tool in preventing injustice. As the investigation and trial proceed, the public will watch closely to see if this legal safeguard determines the fate of a potential $200 million inheritance in one of Hollywood's most tragic chapters.
