The author accused of killing her husband files a lawsuit against his estate

(Trends Wide) — Kouri Richins, the Utah author accused of poisoning her late husband with a deadly dose of fentanyl, sued her husband’s estate in hopes of gaining income from their business and family home, a new lawsuit shows.

The lawsuit comes amid several indictments in the murder case that focus on the couple’s finances, alluding to a possible motive. Included in the criminal record is an expert’s belief that some of Eric Richins’ life insurance and durable power of attorney documents may have been forged. The civil suit does not mention the charges against Kouri.

According to documents filed in the criminal case against Kouri, Eric met with an estate planner and intentionally ordered his estate to be managed by his sister instead of his wife. He established a trust to “support both my wife and our children during any time I am incapacitated and after my death.”

The couple’s home, which is worth almost five times what the couple paid for it, is one of the points of contention between Richins and the trust. Legal title to the home was in Eric’s name, but the filing says the mortgage payments were made from the couple’s joint account.

“Kouri is entitled to half of all the equity in that family home” which the couple bought in 2012 for $400,000. He is now estimated to be worth “at least $1.9 million,” according to the lawsuit.

A prenuptial agreement signed by the couple provides in part that while Eric Richins’ stone masonry business “shall remain the sole property of the husband,” unless he dies while they are both married, in which case “the husband’s interest in said business shall be transferred to the wife”.

Since Eric Richins’ death, his partner has bought out his share of the business, with proceeds of about $2 million.

The prenuptial agreement was presented to Kouri by her mother-in-law “moments before she walked down the aisle” on the couple’s wedding day, Kouri says in a brief filed in the criminal case against her, and “was notarized simultaneously with her marriage certificate for the same person,” the civil lawsuit states.