The deaths of filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner and his wife, photographer and producer Michele Singer Reiner, on December 14, 2025, have prompted an outpouring of grief and renewed attention on the legal concept known as the “slayer rule.” Four days after the couple’s deaths at their Los Angeles home, their son, Nick Reiner, was charged with two counts of first-degree murder.
Understanding the Slayer Rule
All states recognize some form of a slayer rule, designed to prevent individuals who intentionally cause the death of another from profiting from their crime. Simply put, a person found guilty of murder cannot inherit from the estate of the person they killed.
The application of these rules can extend beyond simple inheritance, potentially impacting jointly held property, insurance policies, and other types of accounts. However, most slayer rules, including California’s, apply only to “felonious and intentional” killings – meaning accidental deaths are not subject to these restrictions.
While a criminal conviction or guilty plea isn’t always required, a finding of intentional and felonious killing by a criminal or civil court is necessary for the slayer rule to apply.
How Often is the Slayer Rule Applied?
Tracking the application of slayer rules is difficult, as no central database exists to record these cases. However, the rule is invoked whenever a person who stands to inherit from a victim is found responsible for their murder.
These cases frequently involve family members, and high-profile instances often originate in California. The cases of Lyle and Erik Menendez, convicted in 1996 of murdering their parents, serve as a notable example. The Menendez brothers’ parents’ fortune, estimated to be worth more than $35 million today, was off-limits to the convicted murderers.
Even after becoming eligible for parole – though denied in 2025 – the Menendez brothers remain ineligible to inherit their parents’ wealth. Similarly, Scott Peterson, convicted of killing his pregnant wife Laci Peterson in 2002, was barred from collecting her life insurance benefits.
Potential Implications in the Reiner Case
In the case of Rob and Michele Singer Reiner, the application of the slayer rule to their son, Nick Reiner, remains uncertain. It is too soon to know what the Reiners’ estate plans entail, including the contents of any wills or trusts. The Reiners reportedly had a fortune worth approximately $200 million, and had three other children, Romy, Jake, and Tracy Reiner.
The slayer rule’s application could be complicated if Nick Reiner’s defense argues that substance abuse or schizophrenia impacted his mental state at the time of the alleged crime. However, even without a criminal conviction, a civil court could independently find the killings to be intentional and felonious, barring Nick Reiner from any inheritance.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary purpose of a slayer rule?
The primary purpose of a slayer rule is to prevent a person who intentionally kills another from benefiting financially from that death, ensuring they cannot inherit from the victim’s estate.
Does the slayer rule apply in all states?
Yes, all states have some form of a slayer rule, although the specific details and applications may vary slightly from state to state.
Could a conviction for manslaughter prevent the application of the slayer rule?
Yes, a conviction for a lesser offense, such as manslaughter, might allow the accused – or their lawyers – to argue that the killing was unintentional, potentially avoiding the application of the slayer rule.
As the investigation into the deaths of Rob and Michele Reiner continues, and with the legal process unfolding, it remains to be seen how the slayer rule will ultimately factor into the disposition of their estate.
Worth a look
