Robin Williams’s estate plan provided for both his three children and his wife, Susan Schneider Williams, through different provisions in his trust. His children were named for specific gifts and remainder interests; Schneider Williams received lifetime use of the couple’s Tiburon home and funding for residence-related costs. The disagreement that followed concerned how the trust’s terms applied to belongings and home expenses—not a court finding that either side acted out of greed or bad faith.
Who inherited Robin Williams’s estate?
Williams’s estate passed into his trust, which made provisions for his children—Zachary, Zelda and Cody—and established a separate trust for Schneider Williams. The plan did not leave all of his money exclusively to either his children or his wife.
Court-document reporting described the children’s gifts as including Williams’s clothing, jewelry, personal photographs taken before his marriage to Schneider Williams, entertainment-industry memorabilia and awards, and property at his Napa home. Schneider Williams’s trust provided lifetime use of the Tiburon residence and its furnishings and contents under the trust’s terms, along with a fund for costs related to the home. The provisions were different in kind, and the public record does not support a complete asset-by-asset or dollar comparison.
Why did the family dispute the trust?
The disagreement centered on how to interpret and administer trust provisions. In a December 2014 petition to San Francisco Superior Court, Schneider Williams asked for instructions about the scope of personal-property gifts, what qualified as entertainment-industry memorabilia, whether watches counted as jewelry, which household contents belonged with the Susan Trust, and how a reserve for the home should account for maintenance services and trustee fees. Those were questions she asked the court to resolve, not judicial rulings.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
Belongings and household contents
The trust assigned the children categories of personal effects and memorabilia, while also providing Schneider Williams use of the Tiburon home and its contents under the separate trust. The boundary between career memorabilia, personal effects, household furnishings and items located elsewhere was one source of disagreement. The parties’ competing interpretations should not be confused with a finding that either had a better legal claim.
Costs of maintaining the Tiburon home
Schneider Williams argued that the trust should cover ordinary upkeep as well as unexpected renovations and improvements. She also questioned how trustees had calculated the home’s value and related expenses. During proceedings in 2015, the children disputed her request for additional funds. These were opposing claims about the trust’s obligations and funding, not established findings about anyone’s motives.
Rank #2
- A thoughtful look at the brilliant life and tragic death of a comedy icon
What happened to the dispute?
The parties reached a settlement on September 25, 2015, and trustees asked the court to dismiss Schneider Williams’s petition. Contemporary accounts said she could remain in the Bay Area home and receive living expenses to maintain it. They also reported that she retained some sentimental items, including a watch, a honeymoon bicycle and wedding gifts. The complete terms and final financial allocations were not made public.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Was Robin Williams’s estate worth more than $100 million?
The Los Angeles Times reported in 2015 that the estate was estimated at more than $100 million, attributing the estimate to James Wagstaffe, an attorney for Schneider Williams. That figure was an attorney’s estimate in contemporary reporting—not a final probate accounting or a confirmed inheritance amount for any beneficiary. It cannot establish how much any family member ultimately received.
Quick Recap
What the public record does—and does not—show
- The trust made provisions for both Williams’s children and his wife, but in different forms.
- The dispute concerned classifications of belongings and the funding and expenses of the home trust.
- The family settled in 2015, but public accounts do not disclose the settlement’s full terms or a final asset-by-asset division.
- No neutral, official statement establishing Williams’s personal reasons for each provision is available in the cited accounts. Claims about favoritism, estrangement or a particular motive would go beyond what they establish.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
